Cited by 14Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchMedical Practices and RehabilitationCognitive Functions and Memory

Development and predictors of psychological adjustment during the course of community-based rehabilitation of traumatic brain injury: A preliminary study

Abstract

The aim of the study was to describe the development and predictors of psychological adjustment during community-based traumatic brain injury (TBI) rehabilitation. Forty-two adolescent and adult individuals with TBI (mean age 32 years, 88% male, median post-traumatic amnesia 11 days) participated in a single-group, longitudinal design study. The main measures used were the Reactions to Impairment and Disability Inventory, Adjustment subscale; Sydney Psychosocial Reintegration Scale; Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; and Self-awareness of Deficits Interview. At rehabilitation start, individuals differed significantly from each other with respect to their level of psychological adjustment. Individual trajectories of psychological adjustment were highly variable. However, for the sample as a whole, psychological adjustment did not change during the course of rehabilitation (multilevel regression models; p > .05). Good psychological adjustment was related to low levels of emotional distress and a small discrepancy between current and aspired functional status. Poor functional status had a more minor impact on psychological adjustment in individuals with poor self-awareness than in individuals with high levels of self-awareness. The results confirm parts of theoretical models of psychological adjustment to acquired brain injury, especially the importance of goal refinement. However, the results need to be treated cautiously, given the limited sample size.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09602011.2013.878252

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schönberger, M., Ponsford, J., McKay, A., Wong, D., Spitz, G., Harrington, H., & Mealings, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Freiburg (DE)
  • Epworth Hospital (AU)
  • Monash University (AU)
Corresponding author
Schönberger, Michael
Venue
Neuropsychological Rehabilitation
Published
2014-02-18
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
202-219
ISSN
  • 0960-2011 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0694
OpenAlex
W2168397047
Cited by
14
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1
FWCI
1.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropsychological Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
traumatic brain injury, psychological adjustment, community-based rehabilitation, acquired brain injury, emotional distress, functional status, goal refinement, predictors of adjustment, adolescents and adults
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Brain Injuries, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Predictive Value of Tests, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychotherapy, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review