Effects of Media Sensationalization on Cognitive Performance and Post Concussive Symptoms

Abstract

Objectives: The current study aimed to examine if televised media about mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) framed in a sensationalized manner had a negative impact on cognitive functioning and persistent mTBI symptoms. Methods: One hundred two participants (MAge=37.16; SD=22.61) with a history of post-acute mTBI, recruited through a community research registry and an undergraduate recruitment system, were included in this study. Participants were assessed with a measure of health literacy, the Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (S-TOFHLA), and randomized to watch either a sensationalized or non-sensationalized news clip focused on mTBI. They were then assessed with the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT), Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPQ), Patient Reported Outcome Measures Information System (PROMIS) Depression scale, and the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition (PCL-5). Results: Bayesian analyses indicated that sensationalized media—alone (βPASAT=−0.08; βRPQ=−0.08) or in the context of covariates (βPASAT=−0.11; βRPQ=−0.14)—was not a strong predictor of PASAT score or post-concussion syndrome symptom severity. Conclusions: Although media sensationalization of mTBI symptoms is not desirable, this study suggests that one brief exposure to sensationalized information may not have a meaningful immediate impact on the cognitive functioning or symptom reporting of individuals with a history of mTBI. Future research should examine long-term and downstream effects of sensationalized media reporting in samples with greater diversity of TBI history. (JINS, 2019, 25, 90–100)

How completely are randomized controlled trials of non-pharmacological interventions following concussion reported? A systematic review

“…1 ). These 89 RCTs examined 11 different interventions: sub-symptom threshold aerobic exercise ( n = 15), 1 , 2 , 3 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 cervicovestibular therapy ( n = 4), 4 , 39 , 40 , 41 physical and/or cognitive rest ( n = 5), 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 vision therapy ( n = 2), 47 , 48 education ( n = 15), 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 psychotherapy ( n = 27), 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 ,…”

Misrepresentation of mild traumatic brain injury research in press releases

“…Over the past few decades, mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) has garnered increasing interest from mass media outlets, researchers, and the general public-possibly related to its association with diverse, wildly popular sports. [29][30][31][32] Of all reported brain injuries, the vast majority (70%-90%) are characterized as mild. 33 Classification as mTBI requires one of the following upon some form of acute trauma:…”