Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/881
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMcKay, Adam-
dc.contributor.authorSchonberger, Michael-
dc.contributor.authorPonsford, Jennie-
dc.contributor.authorRoss, Pamela-
dc.contributor.otherLiew, Carine-
dc.date2016-10-
dc.date.accessioned2016-11-11T01:47:18Z-
dc.date.available2016-11-11T01:47:18Z-
dc.date.issued2016-11-
dc.identifier.citationJ Head Trauma Rehabil. 2016 Nov/Dec;31(6):E44-E52.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0885-9701en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11434/881-
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVES: (1) To examine the relations between performance on cognitive tests and on-road driving assessment in a sample of persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI). (2) To compare cognitive predictors of the on-road assessment with demographic and injury-related predictors. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-nine people with mild-severe TBI who completed an on-road driving assessment in an Australian rehabilitation setting. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. MAIN MEASURES: Wechsler Test of Adult Reading or National Adult Reading Test-Revised; 4 subtests from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III; Rey Auditory Verbal Leaning Test; Rey Complex Figure Test; Trail Making Test; demographic factors (age, sex, years licensed); and injury-related factors (duration of posttraumatic amnesia; time postinjury). RESULTS: Participants who failed the driving assessment did worse on measures of attention, visual memory, and executive processing; however, cognitive tests were weak correlates (r values <0.3) and poor predictors of the driving assessment. Posttraumatic amnesia duration mediated by time postinjury was the strongest predictor of the driving assessment-that is, participants with more severe TBIs had later driving assessments and were more likely to fail. CONCLUSION: Cognitive tests are not reliable predictors of the on-road driving assessment outcome. Traumatic brain injury severity may be a better predictor of on-road driving; however, further research is needed to identify the best predictors of driving behavior after TBI.en_US
dc.publisherWolters Kluweren_US
dc.subjectTraumatic Brain Injuryen_US
dc.subjectTBIen_US
dc.subjectAcquired Brain Injuryen_US
dc.subjectABIen_US
dc.subjectDriving Assessmenten_US
dc.subjectNeuropsychologyen_US
dc.subjectCognitive Testingen_US
dc.subjectPost-Traumatic Amnesiaen_US
dc.subjectWechsler Test of Adult Readingen_US
dc.subjectWechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IIIen_US
dc.subjectRey Auditory Verbal Leaning Testen_US
dc.subjectRey Complex Figure Testen_US
dc.subjectTrail Making Testen_US
dc.subjectTime Post-Injuryen_US
dc.subjectCognitive Predictorsen_US
dc.subjectDriving Abilityen_US
dc.subjectRehabilitationen_US
dc.subjectFunctional Tasksen_US
dc.subjectNational Adult Reading Test-Reviseden_US
dc.subjectMonash-Epworth Rehabilitation Research Centre, Epworth HealthCare, Melbourne, Australiaen_US
dc.titlePredictors of the on-road driving assessment after traumatic brain injury: comparing cognitive tests, injury factors, and demographics.en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/HTR.0000000000000209en_US
dc.identifier.journaltitleJournal of Head Trauma Rehabilitationen_US
dc.description.pubmedurihttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26709586en_US
dc.description.affiliatesSchool of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Rehabilitation Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germanyen_US
dc.description.affiliatesNational Trauma Research Institute, Melbourne, Australiaen_US
dc.type.studyortrialRetrospective studiesen_US
dc.type.contenttypeTexten_US
Appears in Collections:Neurosciences
Rehabilitation

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in Epworth are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.