Department of Psychology, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA.
Clin Neuropsychol. 2013;27(2):176-214. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2012.693950. Epub 2013 Jan 29.
In 2009 Pertab, James, and Bigler published a critique of two prior meta-analyses by Binder, Rohling, and Larrabee (1997) and Frencham, Fox, and Maybery (2005) that showed small effect size difference at least 3 months post-injury in individuals who had sustained a mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). The Binder et al. and Frencham et al. meta-analyses have been widely cited as showing no lasting effect of mTBI. In their critique Pertab et al. (2009) point out many limitations of these two prior meta-analyses, demonstrating that depending on how inclusion/exclusion criteria were defined different meta-analytic findings occur, some supporting the persistence of neuropsychological impairments beyond 3 months. Rohling et al. (2011) have now critiqued Pertab et al. (2009). Herein we respond to the Rolling et al. (2011) critique reaffirming the original findings of Pertab et al. (2009), providing additional details concerning the flaws in prior meta-analytic mTBI studies and the effects on neuropsychological performance.
2009 年,Pertab、James 和 Bigler 发表了一篇对 Binder、Rohling 和 Larrabee(1997 年)以及 Frencham、Fox 和 Maybery(2005 年)之前两项荟萃分析的评论,这两项荟萃分析显示,在遭受轻度创伤性脑损伤(mTBI)的个体中,至少在受伤后 3 个月,效应大小差异较小。Binder 等人和 Frencham 等人的荟萃分析被广泛引用,表明 mTBI 没有持久影响。在他们的评论中,Pertab 等人(2009 年)指出了这两项先前荟萃分析的许多局限性,表明根据纳入/排除标准的定义不同,会出现不同的荟萃分析结果,有些结果支持神经心理学损伤在 3 个月后持续存在。Rohling 等人(2011 年)现在对 Pertab 等人(2009 年)进行了评论。在此,我们回应了 Rolling 等人(2011 年)的评论,重申了 Pertab 等人(2009 年)的原始发现,并提供了更多关于先前 mTBI 研究荟萃分析中的缺陷以及对神经心理学表现影响的详细信息。