Cited by 15Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics

Retrospective Identification and Characterization of Traumatic Brain Injury—Recommendations from the 2024 National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Traumatic Brain Injury Classification and Nomenclature Initiative Retrospective Classification Working Group

Open access
Corrigan, John D., Alosco, Michael L., van der Naalt, Joukje, Adams, Rachel Sayko, Asken, Breton M., Hinds, Sidney, Lequerica, Anthony H., Newcombe, Virginia +10 more·2025·Journal of Neurotrauma

Abstract

The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) convened experts in traumatic brain injury (TBI) research, policy, clinical practice and people with lived experience to propose a system of injury classification less susceptible to misinterpretation and misrepresentation inherent in the current use of “mild”, “moderate” and “severe”. One of six working groups addressed Retrospective Classification of TBI. The Working Group consisted of 14 experts in brain injury research representing a breadth of professional disciplines. Initial conclusions based on expert opinion were vetted and revised based on public input at the January 2024 NINDS TBI Classification and Nomenclature Workshop. The Working Group examined five types of methodologies for identifying past TBIs (self/proxy-report, medical record extraction, imaging, fluid-based biomarkers, and performance-based tests). They concluded that self/proxy-report is essential for clinical, research and surveillance applications and that clinicians and researchers should employ elicitation protocols that have been studied and found valid. Medical record extraction was also identified as an invaluable tool for identification of past history of medically attended TBIs; however, there is a need to standardize the case definition employed and procedures used. The use of imaging methods, fluid-based biomarkers, and performance-based assessments in isolation lacked sufficient evidence of both sensitivity and specificity in detecting past histories of TBI to be recommended for this use at this time. The Working Group also evaluated identification of repetitive head impacts (RHI), finding no evidence of a common definition of RHI, a requisite initial step for the development and validation of standardized instruments.

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.2024.0590

Cites

93 of 93 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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 NINDS TBI Classification and Nomenclature Workshop yielded recommendations to expand TBI classification to include additional clinical assessments, neuroimaging, blood-based biomarkers and psychological and environmental modifiers.

    “The workshop yielded recommendations to expand TBI classification to include additional clinical assessments, neuroimaging, blood-based biomarkers and psychological and environmental modifiers (Bazarian et al., 2025; Bragge et al., 2025; Corrigan et al., 2025; Mac Donald et al., 2025; Manley et al., 2025; Menon et al., 2025; Nelson et al., 2025).”

    From Evaluating cognitive performance using the National Institutes of Health Toolbox Cognitive Battery in children with traumatic brain injury (2025) · cites this paper as Corrigan et al., 2025

    The Introduction says the workshop produced classification recommendations, and the Discussion recommends recording clinical, biomarker, imaging, and relevant modifier information for acute TBI characterization. But this paper does not specify psychological and environmental modifiers, and it cautions that blood-based biomarkers cannot yet be used to detect or characterize past TBI. Its recommendations therefore support only part of the broader workshop claim. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [63]Cohen B, Inglese M, Rusinek H, et al. Proton MR spectroscopy and MRI-volumetry in mild traumatic brain injury. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007; 28(5): 907– 913. 17494667 PMC8134347
  2. [64]MacKenzie J, Siddiqi F, Babb J, et al. Brain atrophy in mild or moderate traumatic brain injury: A longitudinal quantitative analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2002; 23(9): 1509– 1515. 12372740 PMC7976797

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Corrigan, J. D., Alosco, M. L., van der Naalt, J., Adams, R. S., Asken, B. M., Hinds, S., Lequerica, A. H., Newcombe, V., Tenovuo, O., Valera, E., Yurgelun-Todd, D., Doperalski, A., Awwad, H. O., Dams-O’Connor, K., Maas, A. I. R., McCrea, M. A., Umoh, N., & Manley, G. T.
Affiliations
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • Boston University (US)
  • University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
  • University of Florida Health (US)
  • Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (US)
  • Kessler Foundation (US)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • University of Turku (FI)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Utah (US)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (US)
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • University of Antwerp (BE)
  • Medical College of Wisconsin (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Corrigan, John D.
Venue
Journal of Neurotrauma
Published
2025-07
Volume
42
Issue
13-14
Pages
1086-1095
ISSN
  • 0897-7151 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-9042
OpenAlex
W4410514155
Cited by
15
References
93
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9
FWCI
10.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neurotrauma (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS112694)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Automotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Keywords
traumatic brain injury, injury classification, mild traumatic brain injury, proxy reports, neuroimaging, performance-based tests, repetitive head impacts
MeSH terms
Brain Injuries, Traumatic, Humans, Terminology as Topic, Retrospective Studies, United States, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (U.S.)

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