Symptom attribution is a stronger predictor of PVT-failure than symptom endorsement in treatment-seeking Veterans with remote mTBI history: A pilot study

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To examine relationships between performance validity testing (PVT), neurobehavioral symptom endorsement, and symptom attribution in Veterans with a history of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). METHOD: Participants included treatment-seeking Veterans (n = 37) with remote mTBI histories who underwent a neuropsychological assessment and completed a modified version of the Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory (NSI) to assess symptom endorsement and symptom attribution (the latter evaluated by having Veterans indicate whether they believed each NSI symptom was caused by their mTBI). Veterans were divided into two subgroups, PVT-Valid (n = 25) and PVT-Invalid (n = 12). RESULTS: Independent samples t-tests showed that two of five symptom endorsement variables and all five symptom attribution variables were significantly different between PVT groups (PVT-Invalid > PVT-Valid; Cohen's d = 0.67-1.02). Logistic regression analyses adjusting for PTSD symptoms showed that symptom endorsement (Nagelkerke's R(2) = .233) and symptom attribution (Nagelkerke's R(2) = .279) significantly distinguished between PVT groups. According to the Wald criterion, greater symptom endorsement (OR = 1.09) and higher attribution of symptoms to mTBI (OR = 1.21) each reliably predicted PVT-failure. CONCLUSIONS: While both symptom endorsement and symptom attribution were significantly associated with PVT-failure, our preliminary results suggest that symptom attribution is a stronger predictor of PVT-failure. Results highlight the importance of assessing symptom attribution to mTBI in this population.

Read the full article
Report a problem with this article

Related articles

  • More for Researchers

    The impact of exposure to morally injurious events on posttraumatic stress symptoms among Israeli combat Veterans: a longitudinal moderated mediation model of moral injury outcomes and dispositional forgiveness

    Abstract: Background: Exposure to potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs) during military service can lead to moral injury (MI) outcomes and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS). This longitudinal study examined the relationships between PMIE exposure, MI outcomes, and PTSS among Israeli combat veterans, and the potential protective role of dispositional forgiveness in these associations. Method: Participants were 169 Israeli combat veterans who participated in a six-year longitudinal study with four measurement points (T1: 12 months before enlistment, T2: Six months following enlistment- pre-deployment, T3: 18 months following enlistment- post-deployment, and T4: 28 months following discharge). Participants’ characteristics were assessed via semi-structured interviews (T1) and validated self-report measures (T2-T4) between 2019-2024. Results: Approximately 36% of participants reported exposure to PMIEs during service, with 13% exceeding the clinical threshold for probable PTSD at T4. PMIE-Betrayal at T3 was positively associated with MI outcomes of shame and trust violation at T4. The indirect effect of PMIEs on PTSS through MI outcome-Shame depended on forgiveness levels. Among veterans with low forgiveness, higher exposure to PMIE-Betrayal was associated with increased MI shame, which was linked to more severe PTSS. Conversely, for those with high forgiveness, exposure to PMIE-Self and Other was associated with decreased MI shame and subsequently reduced PTSS. Conclusion: Dispositional forgiveness moderates the relationship between PMIE exposure and MI outcomes, particularly shame, which mediates the development of PTSS. These findings highlight forgiveness as a potential target for intervention in treating moral injury and preventing PTSS among combat veterans.