What predicts persisting social impairment following pediatric traumatic brain injury: contribution of a biopsychosocial approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psychosocial deficits, such as emotional, behavioral and social problems, reflect the most common and disabling consequences of pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI). Their causes and recovery likely differ from physical and cognitive skills, due to disruption to developing brain networks and the influence of the child's environment. Despite increasing recognition of post-injury behavioral and social problems, there exists a paucity of research regarding the incidence of social impairment, and factors predicting risk and resilience in the social domain over time since injury. METHODS: = 107) at baseline (pre-injury function), 6 months, 1 and 2-years post-injury. We assessed intellectual ability, attention/executive function, social cognition, social communication and socio-emotional function. Children underwent structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 2-8 weeks post-injury. Parents rated their child's socio-emotional function and their own mental health, family function and perceived burden. RESULTS: We distinguished five social recovery profiles, characterized by a complex interplay between environment and pre- and post-TBI factors, with injury factors playing a lesser role. Resilience in social competence was linked to intact family and parent function, intact pre-injury adaptive abilities, post-TBI cognition and social participation. Vulnerability in the social domain was related to poor pre- and post-injury adaptive abilities, greater behavioral concerns, and poorer pre- and post-injury parent health and family function. CONCLUSIONS: We identified five distinct social recovery trajectories post-child-TBI, each characterized by a unique biopsychosocial profile, highlighting the importance of comprehensive social assessment and understanding of factors contributing to social impairment, to target resources and interventions to children at highest risk.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".