Recovery of components of memory in post-traumatic amnesia.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: Post-traumatic amnesia by definition indicates significant impairment of new learning ability, however very few studies have, examined the natural history and resolution of memory and new learning during PTA. Those studies which have, tended to examine orientation separately from the memory processes required to achieve orientation. Analysis of the order of recovery of the items of the Westmead PTA scale was used to examine recovery of memory and new learning capacity. METHODS: The results of daily assessment of 34 patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) on the Westmead PTA scale were analysed for order of recovery. RESULTS: The pattern of rank order of item recovery indicated that Date of Birth recovered consistently first. There was variability in the remaining items, however items reflecting long-term memory tended to recover second and items reflecting simple new learning followed. Recall of all three pictures reflecting complex new learning recovered last. CONCLUSION: The pattern of recovery of memory and new learning during PTA reflects a number of complex, inter-related variables including; the familiarity with the information, amount of rehearsal both before and since the accident and the number of cues available in the environment.

Meta-analysis of the nonword reading deficit in specific reading disorder.

A meta-analysis was conducted to investigate whether specific reading disorder (SRD) groups demonstrate a deficit in using phonological recoding strategies. Thirty-four studies were reviewed that had compared the nonword reading performances of SRD groups with reading-level matched (RL) control groups. The average nonword reading difference between groups across the total number of studies was moderate (d = 0.65, N = 2865). Three predictors of the size of group differences in nonword reading ability were identified. Studies that used passage reading tests to match groups for reading level found significantly less evidence for nonword reading deficits than studies that used word-level reading accuracy tests. Secondly, there was a significant positive relationship between group differences in intelligence level (SRD-RL control group) and effect sizes. Finally, group differences in age showed a significant negative association with effect magnitudes. The mean age, reading level and intelligence level of groups did not significantly predict nonword reading outcomes. It was concluded that there was evidence for nonword reading deficits in SRD groups, consistent with the claim that deficient development of phonological recoding strategies is a leading cause of reading difficulties.