MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117116879 · doi:10.1080/09602011.2025.2607149

The relationship between dispositional mindfulness and psychological, cognitive, and functional outcomes following mild traumatic brain injury

2025· article· en· W7117116879 on OpenAlexaff
Melanie Ann Mascarenhas, Zindel V. Segal, Tyler David Brown, Konstantine K. Zakzanis

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychological Rehabilitation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindfulnessNeuropsychologyAnxietyTraumatic brain injuryDepression (economics)CognitionRehabilitationLongitudinal study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Most individuals who sustain a mild uncomplicated Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI) recover within 1–3 months. However, a significant proportion consistently report ongoing cognitive, psychological, and somatic sequelae, which can be functionally disabling and hinder active participation in society following injury. The present study examined dispositional mindfulness as a targetable protective factor as it pertains to psychological, cognitive, and functional outcomes in the post-acute stage of mTBI. Method. In this cross-sectional study, 45 litigating individuals with persistent symptoms in the post-acute stage following mTBI completed a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment, which included current and retrospective pre-injury ratings of the Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire. Results. Mindfulness was significantly associated with depression and anxiety but not with objective cognitive performance on measures of attention or working memory. Lower mindfulness was observed in individuals who had returned to work following injury compared to those who had not, specifically in the Observing and Describing facets. Pre-injury mindfulness significantly predicted scores on the Psychiatric Impairment Rating Scale, with higher Observing scores predicting worse functioning. Future research employing experimental and longitudinal designs can further elucidate these relationships.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropsychological RehabilitationSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207