Anxiety symptoms and disorders in the first year after sustaining mild traumatic brain injury.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: The goals of the present study were (a) to document the prevalence of anxiety-related disorders and anxiety symptoms at 4, 8, and 12 months postinjury in individuals with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) while considering preinjury history of anxiety disorders and (b) to verify whether the presence of anxiety in the first months after mTBI was associated with more symptoms present 1 year after the injury. Research Method/Design: One hundred and twenty participants hospitalized after an accident and having sustained mTBI were assessed at 4, 8, and 12 months postaccident with the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and questionnaires assessing fatigue, irritability, perceived stress, cognitive difficulties, depression, insomnia, and pain. RESULTS: At 4 months, 23.8% of participants presented with at least one anxiety-related disorder compared with 15.2% at 8 months and 11.2% at 12 months. Overall, 32.5% presented with at least one anxiety disorder over the first 12 months post-mTBI. Participants with a history of anxiety (20.5%) were significantly more anxious after their accident. Individuals who were anxious 4 months after the accident presented with more symptoms in different areas 12 months postinjury compared with nonanxious individuals. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: The present results highlight that anxiety should be evaluated and managed carefully as it appears to be a key factor in the persistence of other mTBI-related symptoms. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".