Trends in Public Knowledge Pertaining to Traumatic Brain Injury From 2016 to 2025.

IF 2.1
Zachary C Merz, Ryan Van Patten, John Lace, Jennifer K Hoots, Lawrence Chan, Nathan E Cook
{"title":"Trends in Public Knowledge Pertaining to Traumatic Brain Injury From 2016 to 2025.","authors":"Zachary C Merz, Ryan Van Patten, John Lace, Jennifer K Hoots, Lawrence Chan, Nathan E Cook","doi":"10.1093/arclin/acaf098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Prior literature suggests that misconceptions surrounding traumatic brain injury (TBI) definition, short-term impact, and long-term implications are common. The current study sought to replicate and expand a previous survey to provide updated estimates regarding the frequency of TBI misconceptions within lay individuals from the United States.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Data were collected from 438 individuals via an electronic survey. Participants completed 42 items designed to evaluate knowledge surrounding TBI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall accuracy rate/percent answered correctly was 60%. Participants who reported having attended a seminar/workshop taught by an expert on concussion or having received formal concussion training (58%) demonstrated somewhat worse accuracy relative to those with no reported training (62%; p = .004). Participants who reported above average or greater exposure to discussion of head injuries and their outcomes in the media (58%) demonstrated slightly worse accuracy relative to those who reported average media exposure or less (61%; p = .013). There were no significant differences in accuracy between participants who: (i) reported having been formally diagnosed with ≥1 concussion by a healthcare professional, compared to those without a concussion history; (ii) reported any formal athletic participation relative to those without athletic participation; and (iii) participated in contact sports compared to those who did not.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>High rates of TBI misconceptions remain and individuals remain vulnerable to the impact of the spread of misinformation across mass and social media.</p>","PeriodicalId":520564,"journal":{"name":"Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acaf098","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Prior literature suggests that misconceptions surrounding traumatic brain injury (TBI) definition, short-term impact, and long-term implications are common. The current study sought to replicate and expand a previous survey to provide updated estimates regarding the frequency of TBI misconceptions within lay individuals from the United States.

Method: Data were collected from 438 individuals via an electronic survey. Participants completed 42 items designed to evaluate knowledge surrounding TBI.

Results: The overall accuracy rate/percent answered correctly was 60%. Participants who reported having attended a seminar/workshop taught by an expert on concussion or having received formal concussion training (58%) demonstrated somewhat worse accuracy relative to those with no reported training (62%; p = .004). Participants who reported above average or greater exposure to discussion of head injuries and their outcomes in the media (58%) demonstrated slightly worse accuracy relative to those who reported average media exposure or less (61%; p = .013). There were no significant differences in accuracy between participants who: (i) reported having been formally diagnosed with ≥1 concussion by a healthcare professional, compared to those without a concussion history; (ii) reported any formal athletic participation relative to those without athletic participation; and (iii) participated in contact sports compared to those who did not.

Conclusions: High rates of TBI misconceptions remain and individuals remain vulnerable to the impact of the spread of misinformation across mass and social media.

2016年至2025年与创伤性脑损伤相关的公众知识趋势。
目的:先前的文献表明,围绕创伤性脑损伤(TBI)的定义、短期影响和长期影响的误解是常见的。目前的研究试图复制和扩展先前的调查,以提供有关美国外行个人对创伤性脑损伤误解频率的最新估计。方法:采用电子问卷调查的方式对438人进行调查。参与者完成了42个项目,旨在评估与TBI相关的知识。结果:总体答对正确率为60%。报告参加过由脑震荡专家讲授的研讨会或讲习班或接受过正式脑震荡培训的参与者(58%)相对于没有报告培训的参与者(62%;p = 0.004)表现出稍差的准确性。在媒体上报道头部损伤及其结果的参与者(58%)比报道平均或更少媒体曝光的参与者(61%;p = 0.013)的准确性略差。与没有脑震荡史的参与者相比,(i)报告被医疗保健专业人员正式诊断为≥1次脑震荡的参与者之间的准确性没有显著差异;(ii)与没有参加体育运动的人相比,报告有任何正式的体育活动;(3)与不参加身体接触运动的人相比,参加身体接触运动的人更多。结论:TBI误解率仍然很高,个人仍然容易受到大众和社交媒体上错误信息传播的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书