The DOI matches its Crossref record; 91 of the 91 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impaired eye movements in post-concussion syndrome indicate suboptimal brain function beyond the influence of depression, malingering or intellectual ability
Open accessAbstract
Post-concussion syndrome (PCS) can affect up to 20%-30% of patients with mild closed head injury (mCHI), comprising incomplete recovery and debilitating persistence of post-concussional symptoms. Eye movements relate closely to the functional integrity of the injured brain and eye movement function is impaired post-acutely in mCHI. Here, we examined whether PCS patients continue to show disparities in eye movement function at 3-5 months following mCHI compared with patients with good recovery. We hypothesized that eye movements might provide sensitive and objective functional markers of ongoing cerebral impairment in PCS. We compared 36 PCS participants (adapted World Health Organization guidelines) and 36 individually matched controls (i.e. mCHI patients of similar injury severity but good recovery) on reflexive, anti- and self-paced saccades, memory-guided sequences and smooth pursuit. All completed neuropsychological testing and health status questionnaires. Mean time post-injury was 140 days in the PCS group and 163 days in the control group. The PCS group performed worse on anti-saccades, self-paced saccades, memory-guided sequences and smooth pursuit, suggesting problems in response inhibition, short-term spatial memory, motor-sequence programming, visuospatial processing and visual attention. This poorer oculomotor performance included several measures beyond conscious control, indicating that subcortical functionality in the PCS group was poorer than expected after mCHI. The PCS group had poorer neuropsychological function (memory, complex attention and executive function). Analysis of covariance showed oculomotor differences to be practically unaffected by group disparities in depression and estimated intellectual ability. Compared with neuropsychological tests, eye movements were more likely to be markedly impaired in PCS cases with high symptom load. Poorer eye movement function, and particularly poorer subcortical oculomotor function, correlated more with post-concussive symptom load and problems on activities of daily living whilst poorer neuropsychological function exhibited slightly better correlations with measures of mental health. Our findings that eye movement function in PCS does not follow the normal recovery path of eye movements after mCHI are indicative of ongoing cerebral impairment. Whilst oculomotor and neuropsychological tests partially overlapped in identifying impairment, eye movements showed additional dysfunction in motor/visuospatial areas, response inhibition, visual attention and subcortical function. Poorer subconscious oculomotor function in the PCS group supports the notion that PCS is not merely a psychological entity, but also has a biological substrate. Measurement of oculomotor function may be of value in PCS cases with a high symptom load but an otherwise unremarkable assessment profile. Routine oculomotor testing should be feasible in centres with existing access to this technology.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The Neurology of Eye Movements
Leigh, R. J., & Zee, D. S. (2015) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780199969289.001.0001 · Cited by 3,820
DSM-IV: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Bell, C. C. (1994) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1994.03520100096046 · Cited by 2,610
Neuropsychological Assessment, 2nd Ed
Fisher, J. M. (1985) · The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · doi:10.1097/00005053-198502000-00014 · Cited by 1,583
Shunk, A. W., Davis, A. S., & Dean, R. S. (2006) · Applied Neuropsychology · doi:10.1207/s15324826an1304_9 · Cited by 1,523
King, N. S., Crawford, S., Wenden, F. J., Moss, N. E. G., & Wade, D. T. (1995) · Journal of Neurology · doi:10.1007/bf00868811 · Cited by 1,460
Strauss, E., & Spreen, O. (2009) · Cited by 1,440
Carroll, L., Cassidy, J. D., Peloso, P., Borg, J., von Holst, H., Holm, L., Paniak, C., & Pépin, M. (2004) · Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine · doi:10.1080/16501960410023859 · Cited by 1,326
Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery
(2012) · SpringerReference · doi:10.1007/springerreference_180120 · Cited by 749
Outcome from mild traumatic brain injury
Iverson, G. L. (2005) · Current Opinion in Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/01.yco.0000165601.29047.ae · Cited by 692
Age-related performance of human subjects on saccadic eye movement tasks
Munoz, D. P., Broughton, J. R., Goldring, J. E., & Armstrong, I. T. (1998) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/s002210050473 · Cited by 656
Cited by
The King-Devick test as a determinant of head trauma and concussion in boxers and MMA fighters
Galetta, K. M., Barrett, J., Allen, M., Madda, F., Delicata, D., Tennant, A. T., Branas, C. C., Maguire, M. G., Messner, L. V., Devick, S., et al. (2011) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e31821184c9 · Cited by 302
Metadata
- Authors
- Heitger, M. H., Jones, R. D., Macleod, A. D., Snell, D. L., Frampton, C. M., & Anderson, T. J.
- Venue
- Brain
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2009-07-16
- Volume
- 132
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2850-2870
- ISSN
- 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2156
- OpenAlex
- W2144585666
- Cited by
- 326
- References
- 91
- FWCI
- 5.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impaired eye movements in post-concussion syndrome indicate suboptimal brain function beyond the influence of depression, malingering or intellectual ability. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/brain/awp181
- The paper
- Heitger, M. H., Jones, R. D., Macleod, A. D., Snell, D. L., Frampton, C. M., & Anderson, T. J. (2009). Impaired eye movements in post-concussion syndrome indicate suboptimal brain function beyond the influence of depression, malingering or intellectual ability. Brain. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awp181
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.