Recognising and assessing neurobehavioural disability after traumatic brain injury
Abstract
Background Neurobehavioural disability often leads to serious social handicap. Many individuals never recover full social independence and will remain largely dependent upon family support, imposing a significant and potentially life-long psychological burden on those who care for injured relatives. Close relationships are at risk and many partnerships break down, increasing the risk of social isolation and subsequent psychological distress to the survivor. Objectives The aim of this paper is to examine the nature of some cardinal features of neurobehavioural disability that contribute to poor psychosocial outcome; consider their organic origins, and problems associated with standardised methods of assessment. Methods A review of clinical literature addressing neurobehavioural disability after TBI. Results Many forms of neurobehavioural disability are subtle but have a pervasive impact on psychosocial outcome in general and relationships in particular. Conclusions Caution is recommended when employing standardised tests to identify the complex and often subtle nature of neurobehavioural disorders. More work is needed to define the nature and impact of different forms of neurobehavioural disorders that comprise this complex form of disability.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Negative urgency impulsivity is associated with excessive agitation, irritability, low moods, and a greater tendency for aggression toward oneself or others immediately following a negative event.
“It is associated with excessive agitation, irritability, low moods, and a greater tendency for aggression toward oneself or others immediately following a negative event [40].”
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 14
- Authors
- Wood, R. L.
- Affiliations
- Swansea University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Wood, Rodger Ll.
- Venue
- NeuroRehabilitation
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-07-29
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 699-706
- ISSN
- 1053-8135 (ISSN-L)
- 1878-6448
- OpenAlex
- W1552197213
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 1.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Neurorehabilitation (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Keywords
- traumatic brain injury, psychosocial outcomes, social isolation, caregiver burden, breakup, standardized assessment, neurobehavioral disorders, social independence
- MeSH terms
- Behavioral Symptoms, Brain Injuries, Humans, Social Behavior
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