The contribution of psychological factors to recovery after mild traumatic brain injury: Is cluster analysis a useful approach?

Snell, Deborah L.; Surgenor, Lois J.; Hay‐Smith, Jean; Williman, Jonathan; Siegert, Richard J.

doi:10.3109/02699052.2014.976594

Cited by 38 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is some evidence that psychological variables are associated with delayed recovery and prolonged postconcussion symptoms. 14,15 In addition, the time course of concussion symptoms noted in recent studies is particularly suggestive of emotional symptoms being associated with duration of recovery. Joyce et al Not being able to use electronics (TV, video games, telephone)…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Young Athletes' Concerns About Sport-Related Concussion

Stein

MacDougall

Quatman‐Yates

et al. 2016

Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Young Athletes' Concerns About Sport-Related Concussion

Stein

MacDougall

Quatman‐Yates

et al. 2016

Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Illness belief schema are a key premise of the CSM; they are stored in peoples' memory and help them to understand and respond to situations (Leventhal et al, 1980). There are now several studies utilising cluster analysis to group individuals with physical illnesses according to their illness belief schema (e.g., Medley et al (2010); Lin and Heidrich (2012); and Snell et al (2014)). While these studies have not involved stroke survivors, illness belief schema have consistently been shown to predict physical and psychological outcomes, and coping/treatment adherence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do individual versus illness belief schema differ in the prediction of post-stroke recovery?

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This longitudinal observational study examined how individual versus illness belief schema compare as predictors of post-stroke recovery. A total of 42 stroke survivors (mean age = 66.9 years/range = 29-96 years; 68% male) were involved. The primary outcome, Health-Related Quality of Life was measured using EQ-5D-5L, mood using Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and disability using Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living Scale. Stroke Illness Perception Questionnaire-Revised measured illness beliefs. Linear regressions showed that individual illness beliefs significantly explained more of the variance in 3-month post-stroke recovery than schema (7.4%-22.5% versus 1.9%-9.9%). Individual versus illness belief schema predict outcomes differently, but which approach predicts outcomes better remains unclear.

show abstract

“…Future work could include more theoretically based modelling work (which would be possible given the theoretical underpinning of many of the items in the MLQ) as well as cluster analyses 135 to investigate which specific mediator and which moderator variables might predict healthy outcomes in the whole HeLP cohort.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cluster randomised controlled trial and economic and process evaluation to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a novel intervention [Healthy Lifestyles Programme (HeLP)] to prevent obesity in school children

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dean SG, Hillsdon M, et al. Cluster randomised controlled trial and economic and process evaluation to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a novel intervention [Healthy Lifestyles Programme (HeLP)] to prevent obesity in school children. Public Health Res 2018;6(1). This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/). Public Health ResearchEditorial contact: journals.library@nihr.ac.ukThe full PHR archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/phr. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Public Health Research journalReports are published in Public Health Research (PHR) if (1) they have resulted from work for the PHR programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors.Reviews in Public Health Research are termed 'systematic' when the account of the search appraisal and synthesis methods (to minimise biases and random errors) would, in theory, permit the replication of the review by others. PHR programmeThe Public Health Research (PHR) programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), evaluates public health interventions, providing new knowledge on the benefits, costs, acceptability and wider impacts of non-NHS interventions intended to improve the health of the public and reduce inequalities in health. The scope of the programme is multi-disciplinary and broad, covering a range of interventions that improve public health. The Public Health Research programme also complements the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme which has a growing portfolio evaluating NHS public health interventions.For more information about the PHR programme please visit the website: http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/phr This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the PHR programme as project number 10/3010/01. The contractual start date was in March 2012. The final report began editorial review in November 2016 and was accepted for publication in February 2017. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The PHR editors and production house have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the final report document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the PHR programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions express...

show abstract

The contribution of psychological factors to recovery after mild traumatic brain injury: Is cluster analysis a useful approach?

Cited by 38 publications

References 54 publications

Young Athletes' Concerns About Sport-Related Concussion

Young Athletes' Concerns About Sport-Related Concussion

Do individual versus illness belief schema differ in the prediction of post-stroke recovery?

Cluster randomised controlled trial and economic and process evaluation to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a novel intervention [Healthy Lifestyles Programme (HeLP)] to prevent obesity in school children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About