A retrospective study of heterogeneity in neurocognitive profiles associated with traumatic brain injury

Primary objective: To establish empirical sub-types, based upon cognitive test results of individuals who had sustained traumatic brain injury. Research design: The study was retrospective, applying cluster analyses and associated statistical tests to an established database. Methods and procedures: Neuropsychological data from veterans with brain trauma were cluster analysed using the WAIS-R and Halstead-Reitan Battery (HRB). External validity of the cluster solutions was evaluated. Experimental interventions: The study was based upon use of an established database that contained cognitive test data and information regarding diagnosis and clinical history. Main outcomes and results: The WAIS-R clusters described sub-groups with near normal function, preserved verbal but impaired problem-solving abilities or global impairment. The HRB clusters differed in level of performance with Near Normal, Moderately Impaired and Globally Impaired clusters. Cluster membership was associated with age and employment status, but not with neurological findings. Conclusion: The outcome of traumatic brain injury is heterogeneous and mainly associated with demographic considerations.

[1]  E. Walker,et al.  Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , 2013 .

[2]  H. Teuber.  The Riddle of Frontal Lobe Function in Man , 2009, Neuropsychology Review.

[3]  G. Iverson,et al.  Neuropsychological functioning following complicated vs. uncomplicated mild traumatic brain injury , 2009, Brain injury.

[4]  J. Lewine,et al.  Objective Documentation of Traumatic Brain Injury Subsequent to Mild Head Trauma: Multimodal Brain Imaging With MEG, SPECT, and MRI , 2007, The Journal of head trauma rehabilitation.

[5]  J. Donders,et al.  Cluster Subtypes on the California Verbal Learning Test–Children's Version After Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury , 2006, Developmental neuropsychology.

[6]  P. T. van der Heijden,et al.  WAIS-III Factor Index Score Patterns After Traumatic Brain Injury , 2003, Assessment.

[7]  R. Hoosain,et al.  Are there sub-types of attentional deficits in patients with persisting post-concussive symptoms? A cluster analytical study , 2003, Brain injury.

[8]  O. Pedraza,et al.  Differential Profiles of Verbal Learning in Traumatic Brain Injury , 2002, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[9]  Y. Stern.  What is cognitive reserve? Theory and research application of the reserve concept , 2002, Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society.

[10]  C. Mathias,et al.  Wisconsin Card Sorting Test in chronic severe traumatic brain injury: factor structure and performance subgroups , 2002, Brain injury.

[11]  R. Vanderploeg,et al.  Patterns of verbal learning and memory in traumatic brain injury , 2001, Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society.

[12]  J. Donders,et al.  Performance on the California Verbal Learning Test after traumatic brain injury. , 1999, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[13]  J. Ricker,et al.  Verbal learning subtypes in traumatic brain injury: a replication. , 1996, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[14]  J. Ricker,et al.  Verbal learning patterns in moderate and severe traumatic brain injury. , 1994, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[15]  A. E. Brooker,et al.  Assessment of brain damage. , 1983, Military medicine.

[16]  P. S. Achilles.  THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CORPORATION. , 1923, Science.

[17]  P. Sopp.  Cluster analysis. , 1996, Veterinary immunology and immunopathology.

[18]  K. Adams,et al.  Long-term effects of severe penetrating head injury on psychosocial adjustment. , 1990, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[19]  A. Moore,et al.  Coping strategies and adjustment after closed-head injury: a cluster analytical approach. , 1989, Brain injury.

[20]  M. Schlossberg.  The Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery: Theory and Clinical Interpretation. , 1986 .