Cited by 34Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchCancer survivorship and carePosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research

Post-traumatic growth and value-directed living after acquired brain injury

Open access
Baseotto, Monica C., Morris, Paul G., Gillespie, David C., Trevethan, Ceri T.·2022·Neuropsychological Rehabilitation

Abstract

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

Crossref · 10.1080/09602011.2020.1798254

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

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
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