Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 343

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mild traumatic brain injury does not predict acute postconcussion syndrome

Meares, S, Shores, E A, Taylor, A J, Batchelor, J, Bryant, R A, Baguley, I J, Chapman, J, Gurka, J, Dawson, K, Capon, L, Marosszeky, J E·2008·Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aetiology of postconcussion syndrome (PCS) following mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) remains controversial. Identifying acute PCS (within the first 14 days after injury) may optimise initial recovery and rehabilitation, identify those at risk and increase understanding of PCS. OBJECTIVE: To examine predictors of acute outcome by investigating the relationship between preinjury psychiatric disorder, demographic factors, injury related characteristics, neuropsychological and psychological variables and acute PCS. METHODS: Prospective study of consecutive trauma admissions to a level 1 trauma hospital. The final sample comprised 90 patients with mTBI and 85 non-brain injured trauma controls. Individuals were administered a PCS checklist, and neuropsychological and psychological measures. Multiple imputation of missing data in multivariable logistic regression and bivariate logistic regressions were used to predict acute PCS at a mean of 4.90 days after injury. RESULTS: Diagnosis of acute PCS was not specific to mTBI (mTBI 43.3%; controls 43.5%). Pain was associated with acute PCS in mTBI. The strongest effect for acute PCS was a previous affective or anxiety disorder (OR 5.76, 95% CI 2.19 to 15.0). Females were 3.33 times more likely than males to have acute PCS (95% CI 1.20 to 9.21). The effect of acute post-traumatic stress and neuropsychological function on acute PCS was relatively small. Higher IQ was associated with acute PCS. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high rate of acute PCS in both mTBI and non-brain injured trauma patients. PCS was not found to be specific to mTBI. The use of the term PCS may be misleading as it incorrectly suggests that the basis of PCS is a brain injury.

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 · 10.1136/jnnp.2007.126565

Cites

3 of 3 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 343

Metadata

Authors
Meares, S., Shores, E. A., Taylor, A. J., Batchelor, J., Bryant, R. A., Baguley, I. J., Chapman, J., Gurka, J., Dawson, K., Capon, L., & Marosszeky, J. E.
Venue
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2008-03-01
Volume
79
Issue
3
Pages
300-306
ISSN
0022-3050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2157263045
Cited by
343
References
3
FWCI
10.05
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.