MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802795784 · doi:10.1089/neu.2018.5662

Fear Avoidance and Clinical Outcomes from Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

2018· article· en· W2802795784 on OpenAlexaff
Noah D. Silverberg, William J. Panenka, Grant L. Iverson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurotrauma · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraumatic brain injuryDepression (economics)MedicineAnxietyConcussionOdds ratioConfidence intervalPoison controlPhysical therapyInjury preventionPsychiatryPsychologyInternal medicineEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Characterizing psychological factors that contribute to persistent symptoms after mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) can inform early intervention. To determine whether fear avoidance, a known risk factor for chronic disability after musculoskeletal injury, is associated with worse clinical outcomes from MTBI, adults were recruited from four outpatient MTBI clinics and assessed at their first clinic visit (mean = 2.7, standard deviation = 1.5 weeks post-injury) and again four to five months later. Of 273 patients screened, 102 completed the initial assessment, and 87 returned for the outcome assessment. The initial assessment included a battery of questionnaires that measure activity avoidance and associated fears. Endurance, an opposite behavior pattern, was measured with the Behavioral Response to Illness Questionnaire. The multi-dimensional outcome assessment included measures of post-concussion symptoms (British Columbia Postconcussion Symptom Inventory), functional disability (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule-12 2.0), return to work status, and psychiatric complications (MINI Neuropsychiatric Interview). A single component was retained from principal components analysis of the six avoidance subscales. In generalized linear modeling, the avoidance composite score predicted symptom severity (95% confidence interval [CI] for B = 1.22-6.33) and disability (95% CI for B = 2.16-5.48), but not return to work (95% CI for B = -0.68-0.24). The avoidance composite was also associated with an increased risk for depression (odds ratio [OR] = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.02-3.02) and anxiety disorders (OR = 1.89, 95% CI = 1.16-3.19). Endurance behavior predicted the same outcomes, except for depression. In summary, avoidance and endurance behavior were associated with a range of adverse clinical outcomes from MTBI. These may represent early intervention targets.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score0.669

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.300
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.173 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations97
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurotraumaSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207