Longitudinal outcome and recovery of social problems after pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI): Contribution of brain insult and family environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) can result in a range of social impairments, however longitudinal recovery is not well characterized, and clinicians are poorly equipped to identify children at risk for persisting difficulties. Using a longitudinal prospective design, this study aimed to evaluate the contribution of injury and non-injury related risk and resilience factors to longitudinal outcome and recovery of social problems from 12- to 24-months post-TBI. 78 children with TBI (injury age: 5.0-15.0 years) and 40 age and gender-matched typically developing (TD) children underwent magnetic resonance imaging including a susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) sequence 2-8 weeks post-injury (M=39.25, SD=27.64 days). At 12 and 24-months post- injury, parents completed questionnaires rating their child's social functioning, and environmental factors including socioeconomic status, caregiver mental health and family functioning. Results revealed that longitudinal recovery profiles differed as a function of injury severity, such that among children with severe TBI, social problems significantly increased from 12- to 24-months post-injury, and were found to be significantly worse than TD controls and children with mild and moderate TBI. In contrast, children with mild and moderate injuries showed few problems at 12-months post-injury and little change over time. Pre-injury environment and SWI did not significantly contribute to outcome at 24-months, however concurrent caregiver mental health and family functioning explained a large and significant proportion of variance in these outcomes. Overall, this study shows that longitudinal recovery profiles differ as a function of injury severity, with evidence for late-emerging social problems among children with severe TBI. Poorer long-term social outcomes were associated with family dysfunction and poorer caregiver mental health at 24-months post injury, suggesting that efforts to optimize the child's environment and bolster family coping resources may enhance recovery of social problems following pediatric TBI.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".