↓ Skip to main content

A Systematic Review of Psychiatric, Psychological, and Behavioural Outcomes following Mild Traumatic Brain Injury in Children and Adolescents

Overview of attention for article published in The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
128 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
297 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Systematic Review of Psychiatric, Psychological, and Behavioural Outcomes following Mild Traumatic Brain Injury in Children and Adolescents
Published in
The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, April 2016
DOI 10.1177/0706743716643741
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carolyn A. Emery, Karen M. Barlow, Brian L. Brooks, Jeffrey E. Max, Angela Villavicencio-Requis, Vithya Gnanakumar, Helen Lee Robertson, Kathryn Schneider, Keith Owen Yeates

Abstract

Evidence regarding longer-term psychiatric, psychological, and behavioural outcomes (for example, anxiety, mood disorders, depression, and attention disorders) following mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) in children and adolescents has not been previously synthesized. To conduct a systematic review of the available evidence examining psychiatric, psychological, and behavioural outcomes following mTBI in children and adolescents. Nine electronic databases were systematically searched from 1980 to August 2014. Studies selected met the following criteria: original data; study design was a randomized controlled trial, quasi-experimental design, cohort or historical cohort study, case-control study, or cross-sectional study; exposure included mTBI (including concussion); population included children and adolescents (<19 years) at the time of mTBI, as well as a comparison group (for example, healthy children, children with orthopaedic injuries); and included psychiatric, psychological, or behavioural outcomes (for example, anxiety, mood disorders, depression, attention disorders). Two authors independently assessed the quality and level of evidence with the Downs and Black (DB) criteria and Oxford Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) model, respectively, for each manuscript. Of 9472 studies identified in the initial search, 30 were included and scored. Heterogeneity in methodology and injury definition precluded meta-analyses. The median methodological quality for all 30 studies, based on the DB criteria, was 15/33 (range 6 to 19). The highest level of evidence demonstrated by all reviewed studies was level 2b based on OCEBM criteria, with the majority (28/30 studies) classified at this level. Based on the literature included in this systematic review, psychological and psychiatric problems in children with a history of mTBI were found to be more prevalent when mTBI is associated with hospitalization, when assessment occurs earlier in the recovery period (that is, resolves over time), when there are multiple previous mTBIs, in individuals with preexisting psychiatric illness, when outcomes are based on retrospective recall, and when the comparison group is noninjured healthy children (as opposed to children with injuries not involving the head). Overall, few rigorous prospective studies have examined psychological, behavioural, and psychiatric outcomes following mTBI. In the absence of true reports of preinjury problems and when ideally comparing mild TBI to non-TBI injured controls, there is little evidence to suggest that psychological, behavioural, and/or psychiatric problems persist beyond the acute and subacute period following an mTBI in children and adolescents.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 297 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 297 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 45 15%
Student > Master 42 14%
Researcher 37 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 11%
Other 21 7%
Other 58 20%
Unknown 61 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 77 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 47 16%
Neuroscience 35 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 5%
Social Sciences 12 4%
Other 31 10%
Unknown 81 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 February 2018.
All research outputs
#3,731,400
of 22,876,619 outputs
Outputs from The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry
#436
of 1,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,177
of 299,219 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry
#11
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,876,619 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,689 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,219 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.