Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Measuring recovery from post traumatic amnesia.

B A Wilson1, J J Evans, H Emslie

  • 1MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK. barbara.wilson@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk

Brain Injury
|August 26, 1999
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Inclusive Search for Anomalous Single-Photon Production in MicroBooNE.

Physical review letters·2026
Same author

First Search for Dark Sector e^{+}e^{-} Explanations of the MiniBooNE Anomaly at MicroBooNE.

Physical review letters·2026
Same author

First Measurement of Charged-Current Muon-Neutrino-Induced K^{+} Production on Argon Using the MicroBooNE Detector.

Physical review letters·2026
Same author

Search for an Anomalous Production of Charged-Current ν_{e} Interactions without Visible Pions across Multiple Kinematic Observables in MicroBooNE.

Physical review letters·2025
Same author

First Measurement of ν_{e} and ν[over ¯]_{e} Charged-Current Single Charged-Pion Production Differential Cross Sections on Argon Using the MicroBooNE Detector.

Physical review letters·2025
Same author

First Double-Differential Cross Section Measurement of Neutral-Current π^{0} Production in Neutrino-Argon Scattering in the MicroBooNE Detector.

Physical review letters·2025
Same journal

Immediate vs delayed concussion reporting: role of concussion knowledge, attitudes, and symptoms.

Brain injury·2026
Same journal

Patient outcomes post self-inflicted traumatic brain injury during the acute phase.

Brain injury·2026
Same journal

Memory alterations over a football season are dependent on athlete position-type and prior concussion history.

Brain injury·2026
Same journal

Managing concussions in New Zealand secondary schools: Let's take it seriously.

Brain injury·2026
Same journal

Stacking machine learning model for risk stratification of acute respiratory distress syndrome after traumatic brain injury: a multicenter retrospective study.

Brain injury·2026
Same journal

Low-intensity focused ultrasound for a child with chronic disorders of consciousness: a promising case report.

Brain injury·2026
See all related articles

This study evaluated cognitive tests for individuals with severe head injuries. It found that orientation, reaction time, visual recognition, and information processing speed effectively monitor recovery from post-traumatic amnesia (PTA).

Area of Science:

  • Neuroscience
  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Rehabilitation Medicine

Background:

  • Severe head injuries can lead to post-traumatic amnesia (PTA), a state characterized by significant cognitive deficits.
  • Understanding and monitoring cognitive recovery in PTA patients is crucial for effective rehabilitation.
  • Identifying sensitive and specific tests for PTA assessment and recovery tracking remains an important clinical challenge.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To identify cognitive tests capable of distinguishing individuals in PTA from those with severe head injuries but not in PTA.
  • To determine which tests are effective in monitoring the gradual cognitive recovery process in patients with PTA.
  • To evaluate the utility of various memory, attention, and learning tests for assessing PTA and recovery.

Main Methods:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Three participant groups were assessed: severe head injury with PTA (n=9), severe head injury without PTA (n=10), and healthy controls (n=13).
  • Each participant underwent repeated testing (20 occasions) using a battery of memory, attention, and learning assessments.
  • Tests were analyzed for their ability to differentiate between groups and track changes over time.

Main Results:

  • Individuals in PTA exhibit a broad spectrum of cognitive deficits, and their recovery is a progressive, not instantaneous, process.
  • Tests effective for monitoring PTA recovery include orientation questions, reaction time, visual recognition, and speed of information processing.
  • Most tests differentiated brain-injured from non-brain-injured individuals, but only two tests distinguished between the PTA and non-PTA brain-injured groups.

Conclusions:

  • Cognitive deficits in PTA are diverse, and recovery is a gradual phenomenon.
  • A combination of orientation, reaction time, visual recognition, and information processing speed tests is recommended for assessing PTA and monitoring recovery.
  • While many tests can identify brain injury, specific measures are needed to differentiate PTA severity and track recovery trajectories.