Post-traumatic growth and value-directed living after acquired brain injury
Open accessAbstract
Traumatic events can be associated with positive change, termed “post-traumatic growth.” Existing resesarch suggests some overlap between post-traumatic growth and value-directed living. This study sought to explore the relationship between post-traumatic growth and value-directed living after acquired brain injury. Self-report questionnaires including the Posttraumatic Growth Inventory, Valued Living Questionnaire, Engaged Living Scale, Valuing Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, World Health Organization Well-Being Index, Brief Resilience Scale, Trauma Screening Questionnaire and Glasgow Outcome Scale were posted to 317 individuals who had experienced a head injury, stroke or subarachnoid haemorrhage in the previous 3–13 years, with a hospital admission of minimum 7 days. Questionnaires were completed by 81 participants. Post-traumatic growth was significantly positively associated with two measures of value-directed living (VLQ, r = .269; VQ, r = .215). Higher levels of value-directed living were significantly associated with increased positive outcomes (wellbeing) and reduced negative outcomes (distress, post-traumatic stress symptoms). There was no significant association between post-traumatic growth and any of these outcomes. The association between post-traumatic growth and value-directed living indicates possible common underlying processes. Value-directed living appears to be a more useful concept, as it was associated with clinically relevant outcomes. It is recommended that value-directed living interventions are considered in brain injury rehabilitation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Value-driven behaviour has already been found beneficial for people with acquired brain injury.
“value-driven behaviour has already been found beneficial for people with acquired brain injury.39,40”
From Acceptance and commitment therapy for people with acquired brain injury: Rationale and description of the BrainACT treatment. (2023) · cites this paper as [39]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 34
- Authors
- Baseotto, M. C., Morris, P. G., Gillespie, D. C., & Trevethan, C. T.
- Affiliations
- Clinical Psychologist, NHS Borders
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- NHS Lothian (GB)
- NHS Grampian (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Baseotto, Monica C.
- Venue
- Neuropsychological Rehabilitation
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2020-07-27
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 84-103
- ISSN
- 0960-2011 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-0694
- OpenAlex
- W3045346817
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 2.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Neuropsychological Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- NHS Education for Scotland
- University of Edinburgh
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
- Keywords
- posttraumatic growth, acquired brain injury, traumatic brain injury, stroke, subarachnoid hemorrhage, well-being, posttraumatic stress symptoms, distress, resilience, brain injury rehabilitation
- MeSH terms
- Brain Injuries, Traumatic, Posttraumatic Growth, Psychological, Brain Injuries, Humans, Surveys and Questionnaires
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