Cited by 302Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchCognitive Functions and MemoryTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances

Executive dysfunction following traumatic brain injury: Neural substrates and treatment strategies

Open access
McDonald, Brenna C., Flashman, Laura A., Saykin, Andrew J.·2002·NeuroRehabilitation

Abstract

Executive dysfunction is among the most common and disabling aspects of cognitive impairment following traumatic brain injury (TBI), and may include deficits in reasoning, planning, concept formation, mental flexibility, aspects of attention and awareness, and purposeful behavior. These impairments are generally attributed to frontal systems dysfunction, due either to direct insult to the frontal lobes or to disruption of their connections to other brain regions. Evaluation of executive deficits typically includes neuropsychological assessment, though adjunctive interviews can be critical in detecting subtle dysexecutive symptoms that may not be apparent on standardized testing. Rehabilitation programs emphasizing cognitive-behavioral approaches to the retraining of planning and problem-solving skills can be effective in ameliorating identified executive deficits. In addition, pharmacological approaches may be useful in addressing aspects of executive dysfunction. This review summarizes the nature of executive deficits following TBI, their neuroanatomical substrates, selected assessment and treatment strategies, and recent research findings and trends.

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 · 10.3233/nre-2002-17407

Cites

63 of 63 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?

  • Damage to densely connected and cognitively relevant regions such as the frontal lobes contributes to reduced efficiency of functional networks relevant to cognition.

    “Specifically, damage to regions that are densely anatomically connected and cognitively relevant, such as the frontal lobes (McDonald, Flashman, & Saykin, 2002), contributes to reduced efficiency of functional networks relevant to cognition (Hayes et al., 2016).”

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: 7

  1. W.A. Gordon, Cognitive remediation: an approach to the ame- lioration of behavioral disorders, in: Neurobehavioural seque- lae of traumatic brain injury, R.L. Wood, ed., Philadelphia, PA: Taylor & Francis, 1990, pp. 175-193.
  2. B. Kolb and I.Q. Whishaw, Fundamentals of Human Neu- ropsychology, 4th edition, New York, W.H. Freeman and Com- pany, 1996.
  3. J. Martzke, C. Swan and N. Varney, Post traumatic anosmia and orbital frontal damage: neuropsychological and neuropsy- chiatric correlates, Neuropsychology 5 (1991), 213-225.
  4. T.W. McAllister, A.J. Saykin, L.A. Flashman, M.B. Spar- ling, S.C. Johnson, S.J. Guerin, A.C. Mamourian, J.B. Weaver and N. Yanofsky, Brain activation during working memory 1 month after mild traumatic brain injury: a functional MRI study, Neurology 53 (1999), 1300-1308.
  5. T.D. Palmer, A.R. Willhoite and F.H. Gage, Vascular niche for adult hippocampal neurogenesis, J Comp Neurol 425 (2000), 479-494.
  6. C.J. Teng, S. Bhalero, Z. Lee, J. Farber, H. Morris, T. Foran, and W. Tucker, The use of buproprion in the treatment of restlessness after a traumatic brain injury, Brain Inj 15 (2001), 463-467.
  7. N. Varney, Iowa collateral head injury interview 1989, Neu- ropsychology 5 (1991), 223-225.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McDonald, B. C., Flashman, L. A., & Saykin, A. J.
Affiliations
Dartmouth College (US)
Venue
NeuroRehabilitation
Published
2002-12-17
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
333-344
ISSN
  • 1053-8135 (ISSN-L)
  • 1878-6448
OpenAlex
W1692107071
Cited by
302
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 26
FWCI
1.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neurorehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Education
  • National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01-NS-40472-01, R01NS040472)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Keywords
executive dysfunction, traumatic brain injury, cognitive impairment, frontal lobe dysfunction, neural correlates, neuropsychological assessment, cognitive rehabilitation, cognitive behavioral therapy, planning and problem solving, pharmacotherapy
MeSH terms
Brain Injuries, Cognition Disorders, Humans, Neuropsychological Tests

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