Although most individuals who sustain concussions recover within 2 to 4 weeks, a sizable minority remain symptomatic for months or even years. 1 Persistent postconcussion symptoms (PPCS) are associated with declines in quality of life and other negative sequelae. 2 To help guide clinical management of this condition, the Danish Health Authority convened a multidisciplinary panel to summarize the evidence regarding the effectiveness of selected nonpharmacological interventions in adults with PPCS and to generate a national guideline with recommendations for clinical practice.In this issue of JAMA Network Open, Rytter and colleagues 3 present the results of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses that provided the basis for their attendant clinical recommendations.They conclude that the evidence base, albeit limited, supports weak or conditional recommendations for the systematic provision of early information and advice, the use of graded physical exercise, vestibular rehabilitation, manual therapy for the cervical and thoracic spine, psychological treatment, and interdisciplinary rehabilitation. No empirical evidence was available regarding oculomotor vision therapy, but it was endorsed as a good clinical practice based on expert consensus.Rytter and colleagues are to be commended for their systematic approach, which followed a prespecified protocol that included use of the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) framework to develop specific review questions, formal tools for assessing study quality, and reliance on Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) for formulating recommendations. They took the rather unique approach of reviewing both previous systematic reviews and individual clinical trials. Their meta-analyses and clinical recommendations reaffirm the conclusions of many existing guidelines 4 but extend those guidelines by incorporating the most recent evidence and including treatment domains that have received relatively little attention in previous systematic reviews or guidelines, including manual therapy and oculomotor vision therapy.The challenge of condensing such a herculean effort into a summary article is likely to blame for several apparent omissions or simplifications. For instance, the comparison treatment in some studies is unclear, and "treatment as usual" is not always clearly characterized but appears to vary considerably across studies, even within specific treatment domains. The omission of cognitive rehabilitation as a nonpharmacological treatment was notable, as was the relative lack of attention to questions of the timing, duration, or intensity of treatment. In some cases, components of treatment were described as if they occurred in isolation when they were administered in combination (eg, manual therapy). Additionally, the alignment of recommendations with existing guidelines was characterized somewhat inconsistently, and plans for knowledge translation and transfer were not described. More information also could have been prov...