Matthew A Clem, Christian LoBue, Jeff Schaffert, C Munro Cullum
{"title":"Traumatic Brain Injury and Risk of Incident Dementia: Forensic Applications of Current Research.","authors":"Matthew A Clem, Christian LoBue, Jeff Schaffert, C Munro Cullum","doi":"10.1093/arclin/acae076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) has been identified as a risk factor for later developing neurodegenerative disorders, and there has been significant attention on this association in forensic settings. As a result, forensic neuropsychologists are frequently asked to comment on risk for dementia after an alleged TBI in litigation and criminal cases. This article provides an evidence-based foundation to aid forensic practice by synthesizing comprehensive information pertaining to: (i) the role of the neuropsychologist in TBI-related litigation, (ii) the complexities associated with identifying TBIs in forensic cases, (iii) the science of TBI in relation to incident dementia, and (iv) current scientific evidence for chronic traumatic encephalopathy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Developing a neurodegenerative disorder after TBI is the exception rather than the rule. Prevalence rates suggest that only a small subset (< 5%) of individuals with moderate-to-severe TBI, and even fewer (< 1%) with mild TBI (mTBI), appear to develop certain neurodegenerative diseases, and the characteristics that place some at risk remain unclear. The literature is mixed in terms of identifying a relationship between mTBI and later-in-life dementia risk. Also, the quality of positive evidence for risk of dementia after mTBI is weak and mostly consists of observational studies characterized by methodological limitations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Methods used to establish the likely occurrence of a TBI in a forensic context are typically more extensive than those used in a routine clinical evaluation. Research methodology to define TBI is often even more rudimentary and inconsistent. Applying clinical research results of TBI and dementia outcomes to forensic cases at an individual level carries significant limitations. Estimating the contribution of remote head hits or concussion in a causal manner to dementia is a challenge forensic experts sometimes face, yet at present, the task is impossible beyond correlations and speculation.</p>","PeriodicalId":8176,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":"289-301"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acae076","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) has been identified as a risk factor for later developing neurodegenerative disorders, and there has been significant attention on this association in forensic settings. As a result, forensic neuropsychologists are frequently asked to comment on risk for dementia after an alleged TBI in litigation and criminal cases. This article provides an evidence-based foundation to aid forensic practice by synthesizing comprehensive information pertaining to: (i) the role of the neuropsychologist in TBI-related litigation, (ii) the complexities associated with identifying TBIs in forensic cases, (iii) the science of TBI in relation to incident dementia, and (iv) current scientific evidence for chronic traumatic encephalopathy.
Results: Developing a neurodegenerative disorder after TBI is the exception rather than the rule. Prevalence rates suggest that only a small subset (< 5%) of individuals with moderate-to-severe TBI, and even fewer (< 1%) with mild TBI (mTBI), appear to develop certain neurodegenerative diseases, and the characteristics that place some at risk remain unclear. The literature is mixed in terms of identifying a relationship between mTBI and later-in-life dementia risk. Also, the quality of positive evidence for risk of dementia after mTBI is weak and mostly consists of observational studies characterized by methodological limitations.
Conclusions: Methods used to establish the likely occurrence of a TBI in a forensic context are typically more extensive than those used in a routine clinical evaluation. Research methodology to define TBI is often even more rudimentary and inconsistent. Applying clinical research results of TBI and dementia outcomes to forensic cases at an individual level carries significant limitations. Estimating the contribution of remote head hits or concussion in a causal manner to dementia is a challenge forensic experts sometimes face, yet at present, the task is impossible beyond correlations and speculation.
期刊介绍:
The journal publishes original contributions dealing with psychological aspects of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of disorders arising out of dysfunction of the central nervous system. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology will also consider manuscripts involving the established principles of the profession of neuropsychology: (a) delivery and evaluation of services, (b) ethical and legal issues, and (c) approaches to education and training. Preference will be given to empirical reports and key reviews. Brief research reports, case studies, and commentaries on published articles (not exceeding two printed pages) will also be considered. At the discretion of the editor, rebuttals to commentaries may be invited. Occasional papers of a theoretical nature will be considered.