Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Neuropsychological outcomes following traumatic brain injury
  1. Sallie Baxendale1,
  2. Dominic Heaney2,
  3. Fergus Rugg-Gunn1,
  4. Daniel Friedland3
  1. 1 Department of Clinical and Experimental Epilepsy, University College London, Institute of Neurology, London, UK
  2. 2 Department of Clinical Neurology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  3. 3 Aquired Brain Injury Team, NHS MDT TBI Team, Imperial College, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Sallie Baxendale, Department of Clinical and Experimental Epilepsy, UCL, London SL9 0RJ, UK; s.baxendale{at}


This review examines the clinical and neuroradiological features of traumatic brain injury that are most frequently associated with persistent cognitive complaints. Neuropsychological outcomes do not depend solely on brain injury severity but result from a complex interplay between premorbid factors, the extent and nature of the underlying structural damage, the person’s neuropsychological reserve and the impact of non-neurological factors in the recovery process. Brain injury severity is only one of these factors and has limited prognostic significance with respect to neuropsychological outcome. We examine the preinjury and postinjury factors that interact with the severity of a traumatic brain injury to shape outcome trajectories. We aim to provide a practical base on which to build discussions with the patient and their family about what to expect following injury and also to plan appropriate neurorehabilitation.

  • traumatic brain injury
  • outcome
  • cognition
  • neuropsychology

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Contributors All authors contributed equally to the conception and authorship of this paper.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed by Colette Griffin, London, UK, and Alan Carson, Edinburgh, UK.

Other content recommended for you