Affective disorders following mild to moderate brain injury: Interpretive hazards of the SCL-90-R

Woessner, Russell; Caplan, Bruce

doi:10.1097/00001199-199504000-00009

Cited by 25 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Results of our study are supported by findings of previous studies. Studies in specific neurological patients groups founded higher scores on the subscales SOM, IN (O-C), and DEP and to a lesser extent on the subscales HOS, AGO (PHOB), and SEN (I-S/PAR/PSY; Tate et al, 1990;Woessner & Caplan, 1995, 1996. This is in line with our results in a general neurological population.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Limitations in the use of the SCL-90-R have also been described for other specific neurological patient groups-for example, patients with spinal cord injuries (Tate, Kewman, & Maynard, 1990), mild to moderate brain injury (Leathem & Babbage, 2000;Woessner & Caplan, 1995), head trauma (Caplan & Woessner, 1992), and stroke (Woessner & Caplan, 1996). These studies indicate limited validity of the SCL-90-R in a neurological patient group with respect to psychopathology.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Symptom Checklist 90–Revised in neurological outpatients

Ruis

Berg

Stralen

et al. 2014

Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Symptom Checklist 90-Revised (SCL-90-R) is an international, widely used, self-report questionnaire of multidimensional complaints with normative data for healthy control subjects and psychiatric patients. The questionnaire is also often used in neurological patients. Little is known about the amount and pattern of complaints in this group, and normative data are lacking. We therefore analyzed self-reported symptoms on the SCL-90-R of a neurological population (N = 600). Moreover, we compared the answer patterns of five subgroups: neurodegenerative disease, cerebrovascular disease, epilepsy, brain tumor, and traumatic brain injury. Neurological outpatients scored significantly higher in comparison with normative data from healthy control subjects, with most pronounced scores on Inadequacy of Thinking and Acting, Depression, and Somatization (p < .01, effect sizes 1.69, 0.83, and 0.83). No differences between the various pathologies were found. Although it is difficult to determine whether the complaints arise directly from the neurological disease or more indirectly from psychiatric disturbances accompanying the disease, simply comparing a neurological patient to normative data for healthy control subjects can lead to inappropriate classifications. Complaints of our patients should not be directly interpreted as psychopathology. A two-step procedure in which scores on the SCL-90-R are first compared to healthy control subjects and secondly to neurological patients can be helpful in the interpretation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Symptom Checklist 90–Revised in neurological outpatients

Ruis

Berg

Stralen

et al. 2014

Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of note, the OFC group reported more obsessive–compulsive symptoms and the LPFC group reported more irritability than controls. Obsessive–compulsive symptoms have been described in patients with OFC damage (Coetzer, 2004; Woessner & Caplan, 1995). Both patient groups displayed few commission errors to task-irrelevant stimuli, and their RTs and hit rates to target sounds were comparable to healthy controls, in accord with earlier studies showing typical behavioral performance in patients with focal frontal lesions on simple oddball tasks (Knight & Scabini, 1998; Knight, 1984, 1997; Yamaguchi & Knight, 1991).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contribution of Subregions of Human Frontal Cortex to Novelty Processing

Løvstad

Funderud

Lindgren

et al. 2012

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Novelty processing was studied in patients with lesions centered in either OFC or lateral pFC (LPFC). An auditory novelty oddball ERP paradigm was applied with environmental sounds serving as task irrelevant novel stimuli. Lesions to the LPFC as well as the OFC resulted in a reduction of the frontal Novelty P3 response, supporting a key role of both frontal subdivisions in novelty processing. The posterior P3b to target sounds was unaffected in patients with frontal lobe lesions in either location, indicating intact posterior cortical target detection mechanisms. LPFC patients displayed an enhanced sustained negative slow wave (NSW) to novel sounds not observed in OFC patients, indicating prolonged resource allocation to task-irrelevant stimuli after LPFC damage. Both patient groups displayed an enhanced NSW to targets relative to controls. However, there was no difference in behavior between patients and controls suggesting that the enhanced NSW to targets may index an increased resource allocation to response requirements enabling comparable performance in the frontal lesioned patients. The current findings indicate that the LPFC and OFC have partly shared and partly differential contributions to the cognitive subcomponents of novelty processing.

show abstract

“…None of the cancer patients were involved in litigation relating to their illness. Just under half of the traumatically brain injured patients were in litigation, with those persons in litigation having higher SCL 90-R profiles [14].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Profile elevations were found to reflect medical symptoms, functional effects of spinal cord injury and self-perception of disability. Likewise 23 mild± moderately brain injured patients reported significantly higher scores on all but two SCL 90-R items [14]. Just under half of these subjects were involved in litigation related to their brain injury at the time of assessment.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 96%

Interpretive risks: the use of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist 90-Revised (SCL 90-R) with brain tumour patients

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients with brain tumours often report distress. Interpretive problems ensue when measures normed on healthy persons are utilized to quantify distress. This study investigated potentially spurious elevations on the Hopkins Symptom Checklist 90 Revised (SCL 90-R). Responses of 17 patients were obtained prior to aggressive chemotherapy. Traditional interpretation indicated that 47% of the patients endorsed clinical levels of somatization, 53% obsessive-compulsive and 59% psychotic disorders. Elevations were attributable to common consequences of brain tumours, medication and the emotional reaction to prognosis. Conventional interpretation would lead to inappropriate classifications. The majority of SCL 90-R item endorsements were significantly different than those of the norm group. Appropriate interpretation of scores is discussed.

show abstract

Affective disorders following mild to moderate brain injury: Interpretive hazards of the SCL-90-R

Cited by 25 publications

References 0 publications

Symptom Checklist 90–Revised in neurological outpatients

Symptom Checklist 90–Revised in neurological outpatients

Contribution of Subregions of Human Frontal Cortex to Novelty Processing

Interpretive risks: the use of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist 90-Revised (SCL 90-R) with brain tumour patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About