Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5959bf8d4d-xqm7d Total loading time: 0.375 Render date: 2022-12-08T11:00:19.251Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

Predictors of 1-Month and 1-Year Neurocognitive Functioning from the UCLA Longitudinal Mild, Uncomplicated, Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2012

Talin Babikian*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
David McArthur
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
Robert F. Asarnow
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
*
Correspondence and reprint requests to: Talin Babikian, Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, UCLA School of Medicine, 760 Westwood Plaza, Room C8-746, Los Angeles, CA 90095. E-mail: tbabikian@mednet.ucla.edu

Abstract

Although more severe brain injuries have long been associated with persisting neurocognitive deficits, an increasing body of literature has shown that children/adolescents with single, uncomplicated mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) do not exhibit long-lasting neurocognitive impairments. Nonetheless, clinical experience and our previous report (Babikian, 2011) showed that a minority of children/adolescents exhibit persistent cognitive problems using performance based measures following what appear to be relatively mild injuries. Predictors of poor neurocognitive outcomes were evaluated in 76 mTBI and 79 Other Injury subjects to determine the relative contributions of indices of injury severity, clinical symptomatology, demographic factors, and premorbid functioning in predicting 1-month and 12-month neurocognitive impairment on computerized or paper and pencil measures. Injury severity indicators or type of injury (head vs. other body part) did not predict either 1-month or 12-month cognitive impairment status. Rather, premorbid variables that antedated the injury (parental education, premorbid behavior and/or learning problems, and school achievement) predicted cognitive impairments. When post-injury neurocognitive impairments are observed in survivors of mild injuries (head or other body part), a sound understanding of their etiology is critical in designing appropriate intervention plans. Clinical and research implications are discussed. (JINS, 2012, 18, 1–10)

Type
Research Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The International Neuropsychological Society 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achenbach, T.M. (1991). Child behavior checklist. Burlington, VT: Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment.Google ScholarPubMed
Anderson, V., Catroppa, C., Morse, S., Haritou, F., Rosenfeld, J.V. (2009). Intellectual outcome from preschool traumatic brain injury: A 5-year prospective, longitudinal study. Pediatrics, 124, e1064e1071.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Asarnow, R.F., Satz, P., Light, R., Lewis, R., Neumann, E. (1991). Behavior problems and adaptive functioning in children with mild and severe closed head injury. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 16, 543555.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Asarnow, R.F., Satz, P., Light, R., Zaucha, K., Lewis, R., McCleary, C. (1995). The UCLA study of mild closed head injury in children and adolescents. In S. Broman & M.E. Michel (Eds.), Traumatic brain injury in children (pp. 117146). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Babikian, T., Asarnow, R. (2009). Neurocognitive outcomes and recovery after pediatric TBI: Meta-analytic review of the literature. Neuropsychology, 23, 283296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Babikian, T., Freier, M.C., Tong, K.A., Nickerson, J.P., Wall, C.J., Holshouser, B.A., Ashwal, S. (2005). Susceptibility weighted imaging: Neuropsychologic outcome and pediatric head injury. Pediatric Neurology, 33, 184194.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Babikian, T., Satz, P., Zaucha, K., Light, R., Lewis, R.S., Asarnow, R.F. (2011). The UCLA longitudinal study of neurocognitive outcomes following mild pediatric traumatic brain injury. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 17, 886895.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bijur, P.E., Haslum, M., Golding, J. (1990). Cognitive and behavioral sequelae of mild head injury in children. Pediatrics, 86, 337344.Google ScholarPubMed
Brier, G.W. (1950). Verification of forecasts expressed in terms of probability. Monthly Weather Review, 78, 13.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Books, B.L. (2010). Seeing the forest for the trees: Prevalence of low scores on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, fourth edition (WISC-IV). Psychological Assessment, 22, 650656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, B.L., Sherman, E.M., Iverson, G.L. (2010). Healthy children get low scores too: Prevlance of low scores on the NEPSY-II in preschoolers, children, and adolescents. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 25, 182190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brun, R., Reichert, P. (2001). Practical identifiability analysis of large environmental simulation models. Water Resources Research, 37, 10151030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, L.M., Dunn, L.M. (1981). Peabody picture vocabulary test – revised manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Fay, G.C., Jaffe, K.M., Polissar, N.L., Liao, S., Rivara, J.B., Martin, K.M. (1994). Outcome of pediatric traumatic brain injury at three years: A cohort study. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 75, 733741.Google ScholarPubMed
Fay, T.B., Yeates, K.O., Taylor, H.G., Bangert, B., Dietrich, A., Nuss, K.E., Wright, M. (2010). Cognitive reserve as a moderator of postconcussive symptoms in children with complicated and uncomplicated mild traumatic brain injury. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 16, 94105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenspan, L., McLellan, B.A., Greig, H. (1985). Abbreviated injury scale and injury severity score: A scoring chart. Journal of Trauma, 25, 6064.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kashluba, S., Paniak, C., Blake, T., Reynolds, S., Toller-Lobe, G., Nagy, J. (2004). A longitudinal, controlled study of patient complaints following treated mild traumatic brain injury. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 19, 805816.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kundu, S., Aulchenko, Y.S., van Duijn, C.M., Janssens, A.C. (2011). PredictABEL: An R package for the assessment of risk prediction models. European Journal of Epidemiology, 26, 261264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moos, B.S., Moos, R.H. (1986). The family environment scale: The manual. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
Nagelkerke, N.J. (1991). A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika, 78, 691692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prasad, M.R., Ewing-Cobbs, L., Swank, P.R., Kramer, L. (2002). Predictors of outcome following traumatic brain injury in young children. Pediatric Neurosurgery, 36, 6474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R_Development_Core_Team. (2011). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google ScholarPubMed
Reitan, R.M., Wolfson, D. (1985). The Halstead-Reitan neuropsychological test battery. Tucson, AZ: Neuropsychology Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Satz, P., D'Elia, L. (1989). The pin test professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Schretlen, D.J., Munro, C.A., Anthony, J.C., Pearlson, G.D. (2003). Examining the range of normal intraindividual variability in neuropsychological test performance. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 9, 864870.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, A. (1968). The Symbol Digit Modalities test: A neuropsychologic test for learning and other cerebral disorders. Journal of Learning Disorders, 3, 8391.Google Scholar
Soetaert, K., Petzoldt, T. (2010). Inverse modelling, sensitivity and Monte Carlo analysis in R; Using package FME. Journal of Statistical Software, 33, 128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, H.G., Yeates, K.O., Wade, S.L., Drotar, D., Klein, S.K., Stancin, T. (1999). Influences on first-year recovery from traumatic brain injury in children. Neuropsychology, 13, 7689.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, H.G., Yeates, K.O., Wade, S.L., Drotar, D., Stancin, T., Minich, N. (2002). A prospective study of short- and long-term outcomes after traumatic brain injury in children: Behavior and achievement. Neuropsychology, 16, 1527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walz, N.C., Yeates, K.O., Taylor, H.G., Stancin, T., Wade, S.L. (2010). Theory of mind skills 1 year after traumatic brain injury in 6– to 8–year–old children. Journal of Neuropsychology, 4(Pt 2), 181195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wickens, D. (1970). Encoding categorized words: An empirical approach to memory. Psycholological Review, 77, 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yeates, K.O. (2010). Mild traumatic brain injury and postconcussive symptoms in children and adolescents. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 16, 953960.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yeates, K.O., Taylor, H.G., Drotar, D., Wade, S.L., Klein, S., Stancin, T., Schatschneider, C. (1997). Preinjury family environment as a determinant of recovery from traumatic brain injuries in school-age children. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 3, 617630.Google ScholarPubMed
Yeates, K.O., Taylor, H.G., Rusin, J., Bangert, B., Dietrich, A., Nuss, K., Wright, M. (2012). Premorbid child and family functioning as predictors of post-concussive symptoms in children with mild traumatic brain injuries. International Journal of Developmental Neuroscience, 30, 231237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yeates, K.O., Taylor, H.G., Rusin, J., Bangert, B., Dietrich, A., Nuss, K., Jones, B.L. (2009). Longitudinal trajectories of postconcussive symptoms in children with mild traumatic brain injuries and their relationship to acute clinical status. Pediatrics, 123, 735743.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
59
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Predictors of 1-Month and 1-Year Neurocognitive Functioning from the UCLA Longitudinal Mild, Uncomplicated, Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury Study
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Predictors of 1-Month and 1-Year Neurocognitive Functioning from the UCLA Longitudinal Mild, Uncomplicated, Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury Study
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Predictors of 1-Month and 1-Year Neurocognitive Functioning from the UCLA Longitudinal Mild, Uncomplicated, Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury Study
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *