Examining the predictive utility of self-report measures for assessing neurocognitive outcomes in justice-involved individuals with traumatic and non-traumatic brain injury
Location
Philadelphia, PA
Start Date
17-4-2026 1:30 PM
End Date
17-4-2026 2:30 PM
Description
Introduction: Acquired brain injury (ABI), including traumatic (TBI) and non-traumatic (non-TBI) brain injuries, is disproportionately prevalent amongst justice-involved individuals. Different mechanisms of brain injury can result in distinct cognitive profiles and symptom burdens, which, in turn, affect functional outcomes. The characterization and systematic screenings of ABI within forensic settings remain limited. Efficient and cost-effective screening approaches are needed within resource-limited adjudicated settings.
Objectives: The aims of the present study are the following: (1) estimate the prevalence of non-TBI ABI within a justice-involved sample, (2) compare neurocognitive profiles across injury groups, (3) evaluate the predictive utility of the Ohio State University TBI Identification Method (OSU-TBI-ID), and (4) assess the added value of the MindSource Symptom Questionnaire (MSQ) in predicting neurocognitive impairment.
Methods: Data will be extracted from an archival dataset from a National Institute of Justice (NIJ)-funded study awarded to the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and will include both self-report and objective measures, including history of ABI, associated symptoms, and neurocognitive functioning as measured by the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS).
Results: It is hypothesized that the prevalence of ABI from non-traumatic sources (e.g., hypoxia) in a forensic sample is significantly higher than that in a general population, and participants with a history of both TBI and non-TBI will have a unique cognitive profile as compared to those with TBI only. It is also hypothesized that both the OSU-TBI-ID and the MSQ will predict global neurocognitive impairment, as measured by the RBANS. A one-sample t-test, MANOVA, and two multiple linear regressions will be used to evaluate the study’s hypotheses.
Conclusion: Findings on differences in neurocognitive profiles based on the mechanism of injury will be discussed with consideration of the limitations of self-report measures. The clinical implications of this study may inform programs and interventions that benefit justice-involved individuals and providers working in correctional settings.
Embargo Period
5-20-2026
Examining the predictive utility of self-report measures for assessing neurocognitive outcomes in justice-involved individuals with traumatic and non-traumatic brain injury
Philadelphia, PA
Introduction: Acquired brain injury (ABI), including traumatic (TBI) and non-traumatic (non-TBI) brain injuries, is disproportionately prevalent amongst justice-involved individuals. Different mechanisms of brain injury can result in distinct cognitive profiles and symptom burdens, which, in turn, affect functional outcomes. The characterization and systematic screenings of ABI within forensic settings remain limited. Efficient and cost-effective screening approaches are needed within resource-limited adjudicated settings.
Objectives: The aims of the present study are the following: (1) estimate the prevalence of non-TBI ABI within a justice-involved sample, (2) compare neurocognitive profiles across injury groups, (3) evaluate the predictive utility of the Ohio State University TBI Identification Method (OSU-TBI-ID), and (4) assess the added value of the MindSource Symptom Questionnaire (MSQ) in predicting neurocognitive impairment.
Methods: Data will be extracted from an archival dataset from a National Institute of Justice (NIJ)-funded study awarded to the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and will include both self-report and objective measures, including history of ABI, associated symptoms, and neurocognitive functioning as measured by the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS).
Results: It is hypothesized that the prevalence of ABI from non-traumatic sources (e.g., hypoxia) in a forensic sample is significantly higher than that in a general population, and participants with a history of both TBI and non-TBI will have a unique cognitive profile as compared to those with TBI only. It is also hypothesized that both the OSU-TBI-ID and the MSQ will predict global neurocognitive impairment, as measured by the RBANS. A one-sample t-test, MANOVA, and two multiple linear regressions will be used to evaluate the study’s hypotheses.
Conclusion: Findings on differences in neurocognitive profiles based on the mechanism of injury will be discussed with consideration of the limitations of self-report measures. The clinical implications of this study may inform programs and interventions that benefit justice-involved individuals and providers working in correctional settings.