有脑震荡病史者报告脑震荡后症状的性别差异:联邦机构间脑外伤研究(FITBIR)数据库的调查结果。

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Clinical Neuropsychologist Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1080/13854046.2024.2371007
Amy J Jak, Victoria C Merritt, Michael L Thomas, Cody Witten, Leah Talbert, Amma Agyemang, Mary Jo Pugh
{"title":"有脑震荡病史者报告脑震荡后症状的性别差异:联邦机构间脑外伤研究(FITBIR)数据库的调查结果。","authors":"Amy J Jak, Victoria C Merritt, Michael L Thomas, Cody Witten, Leah Talbert, Amma Agyemang, Mary Jo Pugh","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2024.2371007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> This study investigated influence of biological sex on postconcussive symptoms (PCS) following concussion using the Federal Interagency Traumatic Brain Injury Research (FITBIR) database. <b>Method:</b> All studies with publicly released data as of 4/7/21 that included both males and females, enough information to determine severity of injury consistent with concussion, a measure of PCS, and objective measures of neurocognitive functioning were used. This resulted in 6 studies with a total of 9890 participants (3206 females, 6684 males); 815 participants completed the Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory (NSI), 471 completed the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPSQ), and 8604 completed the Sport Concussion Assessment Tool-3rd Edition (SCAT 3). Questionnaires were harmonized and the following symptom composite scores were computed: total score, somatic, cognitive, and affective. Data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models. <b>Results:</b> Females endorsed higher total symptoms relative to males and that military personnel endorsed higher symptoms relative to civilians. Additionally, there was a small but significant interaction effect, such that female military personnel endorsed even higher symptoms than would be predicted by the main effects. Similar patterns were observed for somatic, cognitive, and affective symptom domains. <b>Conclusions:</b> Further understanding sex differences in PCS reporting is key to informing the most appropriate treatment options. Future work will need to examine whether sex differences in symptom reporting is due to sex differences in endorsement styles or genuine differences in symptom presentation, as well as the relationship between study population (e.g., military, civilian, sport) and sex on objective cognitive functioning and other functional outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":55250,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","volume":" ","pages":"1468-1480"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sex differences in postconcussive symptom reporting in those with history of concussion: Findings from the federal interagency traumatic brain injury research (FITBIR) database.\",\"authors\":\"Amy J Jak, Victoria C Merritt, Michael L Thomas, Cody Witten, Leah Talbert, Amma Agyemang, Mary Jo Pugh\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13854046.2024.2371007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> This study investigated influence of biological sex on postconcussive symptoms (PCS) following concussion using the Federal Interagency Traumatic Brain Injury Research (FITBIR) database. <b>Method:</b> All studies with publicly released data as of 4/7/21 that included both males and females, enough information to determine severity of injury consistent with concussion, a measure of PCS, and objective measures of neurocognitive functioning were used. This resulted in 6 studies with a total of 9890 participants (3206 females, 6684 males); 815 participants completed the Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory (NSI), 471 completed the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPSQ), and 8604 completed the Sport Concussion Assessment Tool-3rd Edition (SCAT 3). Questionnaires were harmonized and the following symptom composite scores were computed: total score, somatic, cognitive, and affective. Data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models. <b>Results:</b> Females endorsed higher total symptoms relative to males and that military personnel endorsed higher symptoms relative to civilians. Additionally, there was a small but significant interaction effect, such that female military personnel endorsed even higher symptoms than would be predicted by the main effects. Similar patterns were observed for somatic, cognitive, and affective symptom domains. <b>Conclusions:</b> Further understanding sex differences in PCS reporting is key to informing the most appropriate treatment options. Future work will need to examine whether sex differences in symptom reporting is due to sex differences in endorsement styles or genuine differences in symptom presentation, as well as the relationship between study population (e.g., military, civilian, sport) and sex on objective cognitive functioning and other functional outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1468-1480\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2024.2371007\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2024.2371007","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的本研究利用联邦机构间脑损伤研究(FITBIR)数据库,调查生理性别对脑震荡后症状(PCS)的影响。研究方法:采用截至 21 年 7 月 4 日公开发布数据的所有研究,这些研究既包括男性也包括女性,并提供了足够的信息以确定与脑震荡相符的损伤严重程度、PCS 测量方法以及神经认知功能的客观测量方法。结果有 6 项研究共 9890 名参与者(女性 3206 人,男性 6684 人);815 名参与者完成了神经行为症状量表 (NSI),471 名参与者完成了里弗米德脑震荡后症状问卷 (RPSQ),8604 名参与者完成了运动脑震荡评估工具-第 3 版 (SCAT 3)。对问卷进行了统一,并计算出以下症状综合得分:总分、躯体症状、认知症状和情感症状。数据采用线性混合效应模型进行分析。结果显示与男性相比,女性认可的症状总分更高;与平民相比,军人认可的症状总分更高。此外,还有一个微小但显著的交互效应,即女性军人的症状比主效应所预测的还要高。在躯体、认知和情感症状领域也观察到类似的模式。结论进一步了解 PCS 报告中的性别差异对于提供最合适的治疗方案至关重要。未来的工作需要研究症状报告中的性别差异是由于认可方式的性别差异还是症状表现的真正差异,以及研究人群(如军人、平民、体育运动者)和性别在客观认知功能和其他功能结果上的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Sex differences in postconcussive symptom reporting in those with history of concussion: Findings from the federal interagency traumatic brain injury research (FITBIR) database.

Objective: This study investigated influence of biological sex on postconcussive symptoms (PCS) following concussion using the Federal Interagency Traumatic Brain Injury Research (FITBIR) database. Method: All studies with publicly released data as of 4/7/21 that included both males and females, enough information to determine severity of injury consistent with concussion, a measure of PCS, and objective measures of neurocognitive functioning were used. This resulted in 6 studies with a total of 9890 participants (3206 females, 6684 males); 815 participants completed the Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory (NSI), 471 completed the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPSQ), and 8604 completed the Sport Concussion Assessment Tool-3rd Edition (SCAT 3). Questionnaires were harmonized and the following symptom composite scores were computed: total score, somatic, cognitive, and affective. Data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models. Results: Females endorsed higher total symptoms relative to males and that military personnel endorsed higher symptoms relative to civilians. Additionally, there was a small but significant interaction effect, such that female military personnel endorsed even higher symptoms than would be predicted by the main effects. Similar patterns were observed for somatic, cognitive, and affective symptom domains. Conclusions: Further understanding sex differences in PCS reporting is key to informing the most appropriate treatment options. Future work will need to examine whether sex differences in symptom reporting is due to sex differences in endorsement styles or genuine differences in symptom presentation, as well as the relationship between study population (e.g., military, civilian, sport) and sex on objective cognitive functioning and other functional outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Neuropsychologist
Clinical Neuropsychologist 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
12.80%
发文量
61
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) serves as the premier forum for (1) state-of-the-art clinically-relevant scientific research, (2) in-depth professional discussions of matters germane to evidence-based practice, and (3) clinical case studies in neuropsychology. Of particular interest are papers that can make definitive statements about a given topic (thereby having implications for the standards of clinical practice) and those with the potential to expand today’s clinical frontiers. Research on all age groups, and on both clinical and normal populations, is considered.
期刊最新文献
Development of a Symptom Validity Index for the Beck Anxiety Inventory. Interpreting the direct- and derived-Trail Making Test scores in Argentinian children: regression-based norms, convergent validity, test-retest reliability, and practice effects. Enhanced detection of suboptimal effort in psychoeducational assessments for dyslexia. Neuropsychological normative standards for late career physicians. Naturalistic assessment of everyday multitasking in Parkinson's disease with and without mild cognitive impairment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1