Somatic Symptom Disorder After Mild Traumatic Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) may be a common precipitant of Somatic Symptom Disorder (SSD). This study examined the prevalence, correlates, predictors, and functional impact of SSD after mTBI. SETTING: Follow up of patients recruited from emergency departments and urgent care centers. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with mTBI (N = 476). DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a clinical trial (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04704037). MAIN MEASURES: Early illness beliefs (Illness Perceptions Questionnaire-Revised; IPQ-R) were assessed ~2 weeks after mTBI and outcomes were assessed at 6 months post-injury, including SSD symptoms (Somatic Symptom Disorder-B Criteria Scale; SSD-12), post-concussion symptoms (Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire; RPQ), disability (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule; WHODAS), and psychiatric diagnoses (MINI Neuropsychiatric Inventory). SSD diagnosis was operationalized as having persistent symptoms and SSD-12 ≥ 16 (≥23 in sensitivity analyses). RESULTS: 15-27% of the sample met criteria for SSD at 6 months post-injury. Participants with SSD reported more pain and post-concussion symptoms, and were more likely to have comorbid Major Depressive Disorder (OR = 9.1, 95% CI = 5.3, 16.2) and at least 1 anxiety disorder (OR = 5.6, 95% CI = 3.6-8.8) compared to those without SSD. Early illness beliefs, specifically that mTBI has serious life consequences (OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.1-1.3) and causes distress (OR = 1.1, 95% CI = 1.0-1.2), were associated with later SSD. SSD symptoms contributed to prediction of global functional disability (WHODAS) over and above post-concussion symptom severity (RPQ; ΔDeviance = 0.22, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: SSD after mTBI is associated with an increased burden of symptoms, comorbidity, and disability. Early identification of at-risk patients appears feasible. SSD may be a useful framework for conceptualizing poor outcome from mTBI in patients with prominent psychological distress and guiding rehabilitation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".