1986
DOI: 10.1037/0090-5550.31.4.203
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Treatment and rehabilitation of mild and moderate head trauma.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1994
1994
1996
1996

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The label itself is controversial, since it implies a chronic ncuropathological condition underlying symptoms. Issues of labeling aside, many clinicians view PCS as a neurologically real disorder that lies on a continuum with more severe forms of traumatic brain injury Boll & Barth, 1986;Conboy et al, 1986;McMordie, 1988). Moreover, PCS is viewed by some as a subtle form of frontal lobe damage, differing only in degree from the more pronounced frontal dysfunction in severe TBI (Kay, 1986;Varney, 1988).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The label itself is controversial, since it implies a chronic ncuropathological condition underlying symptoms. Issues of labeling aside, many clinicians view PCS as a neurologically real disorder that lies on a continuum with more severe forms of traumatic brain injury Boll & Barth, 1986;Conboy et al, 1986;McMordie, 1988). Moreover, PCS is viewed by some as a subtle form of frontal lobe damage, differing only in degree from the more pronounced frontal dysfunction in severe TBI (Kay, 1986;Varney, 1988).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Gronwall (1989) and Gronwall and Wrightson (1981) conceptualized the changes that occur after MHI in terms of an alteration of information processing capacity, which in turn affects attention and memory. On the other hand, Conboy et al (1986) contended that the cognitive sequelae of MHI become apparent as individuals are faced with complex situations, such as a barrage of sensory information on multiple, simultaneous levels with continuing demands for decision making and problem solving. These results suggest that the subtle deficits found in the MHI group were a function of both capacity and complexity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…These investigators concluded that the deficits identified in the MHI sample w r ere not caused by head injury but were a manifestation of the poorer premorbid functioning attributed to that group (Brown, Chadwick, Shaffer, Rutter, & Traub, 1981;Chadwick, Rutter, Brown, Shaffer, & Traub, 1981;Chadwick, Rutter, Shaffer, & Shrout, 1981;Rutter, Chadwick, Shaffer, & Brown, 1980). Some studies of head injury, however, support the contention that milder forms of insult that occur during childhood or adolescence can affect the ability to learn new material, solve unfamiliar problems, and abstract information (Adams, 1990;Boll, 1983;Boll & Barth, 1981;Conboy, Barth, & Boll, 1986;Gulbrandsen, 1984;Hannay & Levin, 1988;Klonoff, Low, & Clark, 1977;Klonoff & Paris, 1974;Levin & Eisenberg, 1979a, 1979bSegalowitz & Brown, 1991). Deficits in information processing, including attention and reaction time, are among the most salient effects of MHI Gentilini et al, 1985;Gronwall, 1989;Gronwall & Wrightson, 1981).…”
mentioning
confidence: 90%