Bailey Christopher M, Barth Jeffrey T, Bender Scott D
Department of Psychiatry and Neurobehavioral Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA 22908, USA.
J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2009 Mar-Apr;24(2):123-30. doi: 10.1097/HTR.0b013e31819c1caa.
Mild head injury is a controversial topic because patients may have subtle deficits and widely varied outcomes. Accordingly, neuropsychologists are frequently asked to provide expert testimony about the nature of mild head injury. This article discusses how the sports-related concussion literature, including the concept of baseline assessment, can inform expert witnesses who are asked to provide such testimony. We first provide a review of several of the controversies surrounding mild head injury, both within and outside of the forensic context. This is followed by a review of the sports as a laboratory assessment model literature, which demonstrates consistent and meaningful evidence of cognitive sequelae following mild head injury. We conclude with a description of how the sports as a laboratory assessment model literature may be utilized in a forensic neuropsychology context to address some of the identified controversies. We end with a call for more research that will further inform the forensic neuropsychologist about mild head injury and those factors that may result in poor recovery.
轻度头部损伤是一个颇具争议的话题，因为患者可能存在细微的缺陷且预后差异很大。因此，神经心理学家经常被要求就轻度头部损伤的性质提供专家证词。本文讨论了与运动相关的脑震荡文献，包括基线评估的概念，如何为被要求提供此类证词的专家证人提供参考。我们首先回顾一下围绕轻度头部损伤的一些争议，这些争议存在于法医背景内外。接下来是对将运动作为实验室评估模型的文献的回顾，该文献展示了轻度头部损伤后认知后遗症的一致且有意义的证据。我们最后描述了如何在法医神经心理学背景下利用将运动作为实验室评估模型的文献来解决一些已确定的争议。我们呼吁进行更多研究，以便进一步为法医神经心理学家提供有关轻度头部损伤以及可能导致恢复不佳的因素的信息。
