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 R2 = .233) and symptom attribution (Nagelkerke’s R2 = .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.