1,076
Views
63
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Gender differences in executive functions following traumatic brain injury

, , , &
Pages 293-313 | Received 01 Jul 2005, Published online: 24 Sep 2010
 

Abstract

The present study used the National Institute on Disability Rehabilitation and Research (NIDRR) funded Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems (TBIMS) database to examine the effect of gender on presentation of executive dysfunction following traumatic brain injury (TBI) and variables that might impact the course and degree of recovery. The Wisconsin Card Sort Test (WCST) was chosen as a measure of executive function which has good credentials without reports of gender effects. Female subjects performed significantly better on the WCST than male subjects as shown by analyses of variance on scores of 1,331 patients for Categories Achieved (means for females = 4.09, males = 3.67, p = .003) and Perseverative Responses (means for females = 32.17, males = 36.42, p = .003). Outperformance by females was also noted in additional ANOVAs examining the interaction of education and gender, and ethnicity and gender in relation to Categories Achieved (p < .01), and for ethnicity and gender in relation to Perseverative Responses (p < .01). A multiple logistic regression revealed that gender, minority status, education level, history of illicit drug use, cause of injury, and length of coma each contributed uniquely to predicting Categories Achieved on the WCST. Simple logistic regression analyses showed that, of these variables, gender and cause of injury (violent vs. non-violent) were the strongest predictors. In contrast, when examining Perseverative Responses, regression analyses found gender, minority status and length of coma predicted impairment. Simple logistic regression analyses showed that, of these three variables, gender and minority status were most robust in predicting impaired Perseverative Responses scores. Implications of these findings are discussed and recommendations for further research are offered.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Grants H133A020516 and H133A011403 from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), Department of Education, Washington, DC, USA.

The contributions of the NIDRR-funded Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems of Care are gratefully acknowledged.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.