Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 258

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Diffusion Tensor Imaging of Mild to Moderate Blast-Related Traumatic Brain Injury and Its Sequelae

Levin, Harvey S., Wilde, Elisabeth, Troyanskaya, Maya, Petersen, Nancy J., Scheibel, Randall, Newsome, Mary, Radaideh, Majdi, Wu, Trevor, Yallampalli, Ragini, Chu, Zili, Li, Xiaoqi·2010·Journal of Neurotrauma

Abstract

To evaluate the effects of mild to moderate blast-related traumatic brain injury (TBI) on the microstructure of brain white matter (WM) and neurobehavioral outcomes, we studied 37 veterans and service members (mean age 31.5 years, SD = 7.2; post-injury interval 871.5 days; SD = 343.1), whose report of acute neurological status was consistent with sustaining mild to moderate TBI due to blast while serving in Iraq or Afghanistan. Fifteen veterans without a history of TBI or exposure to blast (mean age 31.4 years, SD = 5.4) served as a comparison group, including seven subjects with extracranial injury (post-injury interval 919.5 days, SD = 455.1), and eight who were uninjured. Magnetic resonance imaging disclosed focal lesions in five TBI participants. Post-concussion symptoms (Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms (PTSD Checklist-Civilian), and global distress and depression (Brief Symptom Inventory) were worse in the TBI participants than the comparison group, but no group differences were found in perceived physical or mental functioning (SF-12). Verbal memory (Selective Reminding) was less efficient in the TBI group, but there were no group differences in nonverbal memory (Selective Reminding) or decision making (Iowa Gambling Task). Verbal memory in the TBI group was unrelated to PTSD severity. Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) using tractography, standard single-slice region-of-interest measurement, and voxel-based analysis disclosed no group differences in fractional anisotropy (FA) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). However, FA of the left and right posterior internal capsule and left corticospinal tract was positively correlated with total words consistently recalled, whereas ADC for the left and right uncinate fasciculi and left posterior internal capsule was negatively correlated with this measure of verbal memory. Correlations of DTI variables with symptom measures were non-significant and inconsistent. Our data do not show WM injury in mild to moderate blast-related TBI in veterans despite their residual symptoms and difficulty in verbal memory. Limitations of the study and implications for future research are also discussed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/neu.2009.1073

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 258

Metadata

Authors
Levin, H. S., Wilde, E., Troyanskaya, M., Petersen, N. J., Scheibel, R., Newsome, M., Radaideh, M., Wu, T., Yallampalli, R., Chu, Z., & Li, X.
Venue
Journal of Neurotrauma
Published
2010-04
Volume
27
Issue
4
Pages
683-694
ISSN
  • 0897-7151 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-9042
OpenAlex
W1990525339
Cited by
258
References
10
FWCI
21.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.