Every recorded effect, on one scale

Each row is one number from one study, as the source stated it, with its confidence interval where the study gave one. Rows of a kind share a scale so they can be read against each other. Nothing here is pooled and nothing is converted, because the studies measured injury in different ways and a meta-analysis across them would say less than the rows do. A number that could not be placed on a scale is listed at the end as reported.

Ratios 115

Odds ratios, hazard ratios, rate ratios and standardised mortality ratios, on a log scale. The line at 1 is no difference. A value to the right is a higher rate in the injured or the justice-involved group, whichever the study compared.

Study and measure	Comparison	Value
Slade et al. 2025 SMR	drug poisoning deaths after release vs UK population	74.1 38.4 to 153.2
Slade et al. 2025 SMR	interpersonal violence deaths after release vs UK population	63.3 11.3 to 264.3
McKinlay et al. 2014 odds ratio, any history of offending behaviour, moderate/severe TBI vs fracture controls	moderate/severe TBI 22/62 (35.5%) vs fracture control 1/38 (2.6%)	20.35 2.5 to 162.8
Guala et al. 2026 hazard ratio, violent incarceration given post-TBI substance use	post-TBI substance use indicators vs none	19.32 95% CI 13.32-28.02
Guala et al. 2026 hazard ratio, violent incarceration given pre-TBI substance use	pre-TBI substance use indicators vs none	17.27 95% CI 11.44-26.06
Troeung et al. 2024 standardised mortality ratio, accident/self-harm death	TBI cohort vs Australian population	13.2 95% CI 5.4-12.1
Brown et al. 2014 hazard ratio	TBI cases vs regular controls, baseline to 6 months	10.82 2.86-40.89
Slade et al. 2025 SMR	suicide after release vs UK population	9.9 3.3 to 27.8
McKinlay et al. 2014 odds ratio, any history of offending behaviour, mild TBI vs fracture controls	mild TBI 11/58 (19.0%) vs fracture control 1/38 (2.6%)	8.66 1.0 to 72.1
Albrecht et al. 2019 standardised mortality ratio, TBI	older trauma-centre patients vs state general population	8.1 95% CI 7.4-9.0
Graham et al. 2015 age-standardised mortality rate ratio	women imprisoned vs Scottish general population	7.6 6.9 to 8.3
Massagli et al. 2004 adjusted relative risk of hyperactivity diagnosis, year 1	mild TBI vs unexposed, no prior psychiatric history	7.59 95% CI 2.7-21.6
Glass et al. 2008 odds ratio	prior non-fatal strangulation vs completed homicide	7.48 95% CI 4.53-12.35
Glass et al. 2008 odds ratio	prior non-fatal strangulation vs attempted homicide	6.70 95% CI 3.91-11.49
Messing et al. 2018 adjusted relative risk ratio	multiple strangulation vs no strangulation, miscarriage	5.08 p<0.05
Mackay et al. 2019 hazard ratio	Alzheimer's disease as primary or contributory cause, former players vs controls	5.07 2.92 to 8.82
Russell et al. 2021 hazard ratio	defenders vs matched general population	4.98 95% CI 3.18-7.79
Mackay et al. 2019 odds ratio	dementia-related prescribing, former players vs controls	4.9 3.81 to 6.31
Macaranas et al. 2025 odds ratio	any childhood brain injury vs none, predicting adult IPV-related brain injury, p=0.004	4.652 not reported
McMillan et al. 2015 standardised mortality ratio	homeless people with hospitalised head injury vs Glasgow population	4.51
McKinlay et al. 2014 odds ratio for TBI group, adjusted, from the binary logistic regression (n=111) controlling for current age, sex, age at injury and the three Emotional Behavior Scale subscales	TBI vs fracture control, adjusted	4.23 1.33 to 13.48
Guala et al. 2026 hazard ratio, violent incarceration given pre-TBI mental health problems	pre-TBI mental health diagnosis vs none	4.16 95% CI 2.62-6.57
Fleming et al. 2021 adjusted incidence rate ratio, school exclusion	looked-after children vs peers	4.09 3.86 to 4.33
Wilk et al. 2012 odds ratio	headache, multiple mTBI with loss of consciousness vs single occurrence	4.0 95% CI 2.4-6.8
Fann et al. 2004 adjusted relative risk of psychiatric illness, moderate-severe TBI vs unexposed	no prior psychiatric illness, first 6 months post-injury	4.0 95% CI 2.4-6.8
Luster et al. 2026 standardised mortality ratio	neurodegenerative disease mortality, NFL players vs general population	3.94 95% CI 3.38-4.56
Guala et al. 2026 hazard ratio, violent incarceration given pre-TBI violent incarceration	pre-TBI incarceration for violence vs none	3.80 95% CI 1.89-7.69
Russell et al. 2021 hazard ratio	former professional soccer players vs matched general population, any neurodegenerative disease	3.66 95% CI 2.88-4.65
Mackay et al. 2019 subhazard ratio	neurodegenerative disease as primary cause of death, former players vs matched controls	3.45 2.11 to 5.62
Barry et al. 2018 adjusted HR suicide attempt	re-entry veterans vs never incarcerated	3.45 2.24-5.32
Barry et al. 2018 adjusted HR drug overdose death	re-entry veterans vs never incarcerated	3.45 1.37-8.73
Barry et al. 2018 adjusted hazard ratio, suicide attempt	later-life prison release vs never incarcerated veterans	3.45 95% CI 2.24-5.32
Barry et al. 2018 adjusted hazard ratio, drug overdose death	later-life prison release vs never incarcerated veterans	3.45 95% CI 1.37-8.73
McMillan et al. 2021 rate ratio	time spent in prison, significant head injury vs no significant head injury, adjusted for current factors	3.4 1.3 to 8.4
Farrer et al. 2013 summary odds ratio	juvenile offenders vs controls, 5 studies	3.378 lower limit 1.515, upper limit 7.536
Farrer et al. 2013 summary odds ratio, TBI history, juvenile offenders vs controls	5 controlled studies	3.37 not reported
Farrer et al. 2013 summary odds ratio	juvenile offenders vs non-offender controls	3.37
Kent et al. 2024 odds ratio, historic suicide attempt, TBI vs no TBI	reception screening, Welsh category B prison	3.3 1.51-6.60
Kent et al. 2024 odds ratio, historic suicide attempt	historic TBI vs no historic TBI	3.3 1.51-6.60
Graham et al. 2015 age-standardised mortality rate ratio	men imprisoned vs Scottish general population	3.3 3.2 to 3.4
Fazel et al. 2011 adjusted odds ratio, violent crime, TBI vs population controls	TBI cases vs 10 matched population controls each	3.3 95% CI 3.1-3.5
Fazel et al. 2011 adjusted odds ratio, violent crime, TBI vs population controls	TBI cases vs matched general population	3.3 3.1-3.5
Macaranas et al. 2025 odds ratio	per additional childhood brain injury, predicting adult IPV-related brain injury, p=0.005	3.198 not reported
McMillan et al. 2021 odds ratio	violent offending history, significant head injury vs no significant head injury, unadjusted	3.1 1.2 to 8.1
McMillan et al. 2021 odds ratio	violent offending history, adjusted for current factors including PTSD comorbidities	3.1 1.1 to 9.0
Fahmy et al. 2023 odds ratio, psychosis	head injury vs no head injury	3.093 1.601-5.975
Fahmy et al. 2023 OR psychosis	head injury vs no head injury	3.09 1.60-5.98
Luster et al. 2026 standardised mortality ratio	residual neurodegenerative disease mortality after adjusting for competing risks	3.04 95% CI 2.63-3.50
McMillan et al. 2019 OR three or more hospitalised head injuries	prisoners vs matched general population	3.04 2.33-3.97
McMillan et al. 2019 odds ratio, 3+ HHI episodes	prisoners vs matched general population	3.04 95% CI 2.33-3.97
McMillan et al. 2019 odds ratio, 3+ HHI, prisoners vs controls	repetitive injury	3.04 2.33-3.97
Ineson et al. 2022 incidence rate ratio, suicide attempt, males	TBI vs no TBI, whole Danish population	3.00 95% CI 2.93-3.08
Fahmy et al. 2023 odds ratio, trauma flashbacks	head injury vs no head injury	2.950 1.740-5.001
Fahmy et al. 2023 OR trauma flashbacks	head injury vs no head injury	2.95 1.74-5.00
Messing et al. 2018 adjusted relative risk ratio	multiple strangulation vs no strangulation, loss of consciousness	2.95 p<0.05
McMillan et al. 2025 multivariable OR for violent offending	significant head injury vs none	2.94 1.25-6.89
Fann et al. 2004 adjusted relative risk of psychiatric illness, mild TBI vs unexposed	no prior psychiatric illness, first 6 months post-injury	2.8 95% CI 2.1-3.7
Ineson et al. 2022 incidence rate ratio, suicide attempt, females	TBI vs no TBI, whole Danish population	2.78 95% CI 2.71-2.85
Kent et al. 2024 odds ratio, historic self-harm	bullied at school vs not bullied	2.7 1.63-6.09
McIsaac et al. 2016 adjusted hazard ratio, incarceration	prior TBI vs no prior TBI, whole Ontario population aged 18-28	approximately 2.5
McIsaac et al. 2016 adjusted hazard ratio for incarceration	prior TBI vs no prior TBI	approximately 2.5
Ineson et al. 2022 incidence rate ratio, violent crime, females	TBI vs no TBI, whole Danish population	2.43 95% CI 2.36-2.49
Ilie et al. 2015 adjusted odds ratio	hazardous/harmful drinking, TBI vs no TBI	2.3
Mackay et al. 2019 hazard ratio	Parkinson's disease as primary or contributory cause, former players vs controls	2.15 1.17 to 3.96
McMillan et al. 2019 OR hospitalised head injury, prisoners vs general population	prisoners vs matched general population	2.1 1.87-2.16
McMillan et al. 2019 odds ratio, any HHI	prisoners vs matched general population	2.10 95% CI 1.87-2.16
McMillan et al. 2019 odds ratio, any HHI, prisoners vs matched general population	whole census population, Scotland	2.10 1.87-2.16
Massagli et al. 2004 adjusted relative risk of any psychiatric illness, year 1	mild TBI vs unexposed, no prior psychiatric history	2.03 95% CI 1.4-2.9
Turner et al. 2020 adjusted odds ratio	TBI history and problem gambling, adjusted for drinking and suicidality	2.0
Fazel et al. 2011 adjusted odds ratio, violent crime, TBI vs unaffected siblings	TBI cases vs full siblings without TBI	2.0 95% CI 1.8-2.3
Fazel et al. 2011 adjusted odds ratio, violent crime, TBI vs unaffected siblings	TBI cases vs unaffected siblings	2.0 1.8-2.3
Fazel et al. 2011 adjusted odds ratio, TBI vs sibling control	unaffected full siblings	2.0 1.8 to 2.3
Schofield et al. 2015 hazard ratio, violent conviction, males, sibling comparison	TBI vs unaffected full sibling	1.89 95% CI 1.20-3.00
Schofield et al. 2015 hazard ratio, violent conviction, sibling comparison, males	affected vs unaffected full sibling	1.89 1.20 to 3.00
Shiroma et al. 2010 rate ratio, violent infractions (men)	TBI vs no TBI	1.86 1.54-2.24
Russell et al. 2021 hazard ratio	goalkeepers vs matched general population	1.83 95% CI 0.93-3.60
McMillan et al. 2019 odds ratio, intracranial-coded HHI, prisoners vs controls	injury severity	1.81 1.54-2.11
Ineson et al. 2022 incidence rate ratio, violent crime, males	TBI vs no TBI, whole Danish population	1.80 95% CI 1.78-1.82
Kumar et al. 2017 risk ratio, return to work vs no intervention	cognitive rehabilitation vs no intervention	1.80 95% CI 0.74 to 4.39
To et al. 2015 adjusted odds ratio	arrest or incarceration at 1-year follow-up, TBI vs no TBI	1.79 1.3 to 2.48
Schofield et al. 2015 hazard ratio, any conviction, males, sibling comparison	TBI vs unaffected full sibling	1.68 95% CI 1.31-2.18
Schofield et al. 2015 hazard ratio, any conviction, sibling comparison, males	affected vs unaffected full sibling	1.68 1.31 to 2.18
Taylor et al. 2020 odds ratio	criminal justice involvement, veterans with vs without PTSD	1.61 95% CI 1.16-2.23
Taylor et al. 2020 odds ratio	arrest for violent offence, veterans with vs without PTSD	1.59 95% CI 1.15-2.19
Schofield et al. 2015 hazard ratio, any conviction, males, vs population controls	TBI vs matched community controls	1.58 95% CI 1.46-1.72
Bonow et al. 2019 subdistribution hazard ratio, any arrest, TBI vs uninjured	TBI patients vs uninjured hospitalised patients	1.57 95% CI 1.49-1.62
Bonow et al. 2019 subdistribution hazard ratio, any arrest, injured no-TBI vs uninjured	injured non-TBI patients vs uninjured hospitalised patients	1.55 95% CI 1.49-1.62
Vattipally et al. 2026 odds ratio, inpatient mortality	incarcerated vs matched non-incarcerated TBI patients	1.49 95% CI 1.12-1.99
Vattipally et al. 2026 adjusted odds ratio, inpatient mortality	incarcerated vs matched non-incarcerated TBI patients	1.49 1.12-1.99
Matheson et al. 2020 unadjusted relative risk, serious disciplinary charge	TBI vs no TBI	1.39 95% CI 1.29-1.49
Matheson et al. 2020 unadjusted relative risk of serious disciplinary charge	TBI vs no TBI	1.39 1.29-1.49
Visnick et al. 2023 IRR	school exclusion, children hospitalised for TBI vs peers, adjusted	1.33 1.15 to 1.55
Shiroma et al. 2010 rate ratio, all infractions (men)	TBI vs no TBI	1.32 1.12-1.55
Visnick et al. 2023 OR	special educational need, TBI vs peers, adjusted	1.28 1.18 to 1.39
Blaabaek et al. 2024 odds ratio, criminal charges age 15-20, whole population comparison	mTBI before age 10 vs no injury, whole population	1.26 95% CI 1.19-1.34
Blaabaek et al. 2024 odds ratio, criminal charges, population-average model	mTBI before age 10 vs no injury	1.26 1.19 to 1.34
Blaabaek et al. 2024 odds ratio, criminal convictions age 15-20, whole population comparison	mTBI before age 10 vs no injury, whole population	1.24 95% CI 1.16-1.33
McKinlay et al. 2014 odds ratio, malevolent aggression (per unit), adjusted, same model	within the regression predicting offending behaviour	1.23 1.06 to 1.42
Shiroma et al. 2010 rate ratio, nonviolent infractions (men)	TBI vs no TBI	1.19 1.00-1.41
Matheson et al. 2020 adjusted relative risk, serious disciplinary charge	TBI vs no TBI, adjusted	1.14 95% CI 1.06-1.22
Matheson et al. 2020 adjusted relative risk of serious disciplinary charge	TBI vs no TBI, adjusted	1.14 1.06-1.22
Matheson et al. 2020 adjusted risk ratio	serious prison disciplinary charge, TBI history vs none	1.14 95% CI 1.06-1.22
Fazel et al. 2011 adjusted odds ratio, violent crime, epilepsy vs unaffected siblings	epilepsy cases vs full siblings without epilepsy	1.1 95% CI 0.9-1.2
Brown et al. 2014 hazard ratio	6-month TBI survivors vs regular or special controls, long-term	1.05 0.80-1.38
Visnick et al. 2023 OR	unemployment 6 months after leaving school, TBI vs peers, adjusted	1.03 0.92 to 1.16
Albrecht et al. 2019 hazard ratio, TBI vs non-TBI trauma	all-cause mortality, adjusted	1.03 95% CI 0.87-1.23
Bonow et al. 2019 subdistribution hazard ratio, any arrest, TBI vs injured non-TBI	TBI patients vs injured patients without TBI, direct comparison	1.02 95% CI 0.94-1.11
Sawadogo et al. 2020 odds ratio, hospital mortality trend 2006-2012	Canada-wide TBI admissions	0.95 95% CI 0.92-0.98
McKinlay et al. 2014 odds ratio, age at injury (per year), adjusted, same model, NOT statistically significant (P<.20)	within the regression predicting offending behaviour	0.92 0.82 to 1.03
Vattipally et al. 2026 odds ratio, cranial surgery	incarcerated vs matched non-incarcerated	0.76 95% CI 0.60-0.97
Vattipally et al. 2026 adjusted odds ratio, cranial surgery	incarcerated vs matched non-incarcerated TBI patients	0.76 0.60-0.97
Mackay et al. 2019 hazard ratio	neurodegenerative disease mortality, goalkeepers vs outfield players	0.73 0.43 to 1.24
Schofield et al. 2015 hazard ratio, violent conviction, females, sibling comparison	TBI vs unaffected full sibling	0.73 95% CI 0.29-1.81
Luster et al. 2026 standardised mortality ratio	all-cause mortality, NFL players vs general population	0.70 95% CI 0.67-0.74
Mackay et al. 2019 odds ratio	dementia-related prescribing, goalkeepers vs outfield players	0.41 0.19 to 0.89

Proportions 34

Prevalence, sensitivity, specificity and other percentages. Prevalence figures sit on very different methods of ascertainment, which the comparison column names, so they should be read within a method rather than across methods.

Study and measure	Comparison	Value
Harris et al. 2024 sensitivity	CDC/ACRM definitions of mild TBI	100%
Bennett et al. 2015 specificity	severe TBI linkage accuracy	99.99%
Bennett et al. 2015 positive predictive value	severe TBI linkage accuracy	98%
Malec et al. 2007 specificity	Moderate-Severe (Definite) TBI classification	98%
Zollman et al. 2014 sensitivity	screen vs comprehensive diagnostic assessment	96%
Libuy et al. 2021 linkage rate	National Pupil Database to HES, all cohorts combined	95%
Donnelly et al. 2011 sensitivity	VATBIST vs comprehensive assessment	0.94
McCormick et al. 2026 per cent rating strangulation high-risk		92.6%
Malec et al. 2007 sensitivity	Moderate-Severe (Definite) TBI classification	89%
Kim et al. 2024 true match rate	deterministic linkage using partial identifiers, Korean HIRA data	83.5%
Terrio et al. 2011 sensitivity (2-item rule)	vs clinician-confirmed TBI diagnosis	80%
Zollman et al. 2014 specificity	screen vs comprehensive diagnostic assessment	64%
Brooke et al. 1996 psychiatric disorder prevalence	male unconvicted prisoners, England and Wales	63%
Shiroma et al. 2010 pooled prevalence	overall offender population, 20 studies	60.25% 48.08 to 72.41
Shiroma et al. 2010 pooled prevalence	offender population overall	60.25% 48.08-72.41%
Terrio et al. 2011 sensitivity (4-item rule)	vs clinician-confirmed TBI diagnosis	60%
Donnelly et al. 2011 specificity	VATBIST vs comprehensive assessment	0.59
Hunzinger et al. 2026 pooled prevalence	lifetime TBI, law enforcement and corrections officers	58.8% 95% CI 48.0-69.6%
Olson-Madden et al. 2010 prevalence	veterans in outpatient substance abuse treatment, TBI-4 screen	55% 49% to 61%
Farrer et al. 2011 unweighted pooled prevalence	24 incarcerated samples	51.1% not reported
Farrer et al. 2011 random-effects pooled prevalence	24 incarcerated samples	51.0% not reported
de Geus et al. 2021 ABI prevalence, offenders	vs approximately 12 per cent in general population	~50%
Durand et al. 2017 average prevalence of TBI history	across 33 studies, n=9,342	46% range 9.7-100%
Hunter et al. 2023 pooled lifetime TBI prevalence	64 studies, n=52,540	45.8% 95% CI 37.8-54.1; 95% PI 5.5-92.5
Hunter et al. 2023 pooled lifetime TBI prevalence	adults across criminal legal system settings	45.8% 37.8 to 54.1
Farrer et al. 2011 weighted pooled prevalence	2,079 of 5,049 people in 24 incarcerated samples	41.2% not reported
Max et al. 2000 persistent personality change prevalence	severe TBI, 2 years post-injury	approximately 40%
Hunter et al. 2023 pooled moderate-to-severe TBI prevalence	64 studies	32.0% 95% CI 25.0-39.8; 95% PI 11.2-63.6
Farrer et al. 2013 pooled prevalence	467 of 1,524 juvenile offenders, 9 studies	30.6% not reported
Yang et al. 2005 prefrontal grey matter volume reduction	unsuccessful psychopaths vs controls	22.3%
Gilchrist and Morrison 2005 alcohol-related brain damage prevalence	UK homeless hostel dwellers, Glasgow	21%
Hunzinger et al. 2026 pooled prevalence	job/career-related TBI, law enforcement and corrections officers	17.2% 95% CI 5.8-28.6%
Raine et al. 2000 prefrontal grey matter volume reduction	APD vs healthy controls	11.0%
Harris et al. 2024 specificity	CDC/ACRM definitions of mild TBI	0%

Accuracy and agreement 9

Area under the curve, kappa and correlation coefficients. The line at 0.5 is where a classifier does no better than chance; it is not a reference point for a correlation.

Study and measure	Comparison	Value
Theadom et al. 2021 Cronbach alpha (BIST total)	internal consistency	0.94
Theadom et al. 2021 Pearson r (BIST vs RPQ)	concurrent validity	0.91
Rowland et al. 2020 kappa (MMA-TBI vs OSU TBI-ID)	instrument concordance	0.90
Fortier et al. 2014 Cohen kappa (BAT-L vs OSU TBI-ID)	concordance between instruments	0.89
McKee et al. 2016 Cohen's kappa	inter-rater agreement specifically for CTE diagnosis	0.78
Ogonah et al. 2026 AUC	1-year violent victimisation prediction	0.72
Messing et al. 2017 AUC	DA-5 with strangulation item predicting severe or near-lethal re-assault	0.68
Ogonah et al. 2026 AUC	3-year violent victimisation prediction	0.67
McKee et al. 2016 Cohen's kappa	inter-rater agreement among 7 neuropathologists across 25 tauopathy cases	0.67

Standardised differences 4

Cohen's d and similar. The line at 0 is no difference.

Study and measure	Comparison	Value
Anderson et al. 2023 Hedges' g, severity of methamphetamine dependence	GMT vs Brain Health Workshop control	1.47
Griffith et al. 2026 Cohen's d, physical aggression, any TBI vs none	detained youth with vs without TBI history	0.46
Kent et al. 2023 effect size, functional neurodisability screener	looked-after-child prisoners vs other sentenced prisoners	0.24
Anderson et al. 2023 Hedges' g, self-reported executive function	GMT vs Brain Health Workshop control	0.06

Reported in a form that does not plot 47

Before-and-after means, rates per 100,000 person-years, relative changes and figures given in words. They are listed as the source stated them.

Study and measure	Comparison	Value	Interval
Feler et al. 2026in-hospital mortality, severe TBI	prison vs matched non-incarcerated, p=0.03	30.9% vs 25.7%
Feler et al. 2026adjusted relative risk of mortality	prison vs matched non-incarcerated, severe TBI	43% increased
Feler et al. 2026mortality	severe TBI, incarcerated vs matched non-incarcerated, p=0.03	30.9% vs 25.7%
Guala et al. 2026incidence rate, incarceration for violence post-TBI	TBI cohort, Victoria Australia	409.31 per 100,000 person-years
McCormick et al. 2026per cent who would refer for loss of consciousness		approximately two-thirds
McCormick et al. 2026per cent who would refer for incontinence		fewer than half
Brainkind 2025GAD-7 anxiety, pre-post mean	pre-post, no control group	15.14 to 11.55
Brainkind 2025PHQ-9 depression, pre-post mean	pre-post, no control group	16.47 to 11.61
Christensen et al. 2025total epilepsy prevalence	Danish national register vs GBD 2019 estimate of 682 per 100,000	697 per 100,000	95% CI 691-704
Cranshaw et al. 2025sensitivity for head injury detection	HELP-PC vs prior tool (McKinnon and Grubin 2012)	72% vs 17%
De Sousa-De Sousa et al. 2025pooled peak linear acceleration	concussive events across included rugby studies	63.01 g
Misak and United Kingdom Acquired Brain Injury Forum 2025return on investment for severe TBI rehabilitation	modelled lifetime cost of rehabilitation (about GBP 43,000 per patient) vs modelled lifetime savings (about GBP 680,000 per patient)	16:1
UK Acquired Brain Injury Forum (UKABIF) and Acquired Brain Injury Justice Network 2025increased risk of disciplinary sanctions in prison	people with ABI vs without, as cited in the review	39% increased risk
Wang 2025EAPC prevalence	TBI age-standardised rate 1990-2021	-0.68
Blaabaek et al. 2024odds ratio, criminal charges, sibling/twin fixed-effects model	mTBI before age 10 vs no injury, within-family	statistically insignificant, greatly reduced
Carr et al. 2024incident rate ratio range, co-occurring head injury and conduct problems vs either alone or neither, age 14	co-occurring exposure vs single or no exposure	1.20 to 1.60
Huang et al. 2024age-standardised incidence rate	global TBI, 2019	346 per 100,000	95% UI 298-401
Modak et al. 2024prevalence of pediatric TBI history among incarcerated adults	both sexes	approximately 35-45%
Boglo et al. 2023GAD-7 anxiety, pre-post mean	pre-post, no control group	15.38 to 11.84
Boglo et al. 2023PHQ-9 depression, pre-post mean	pre-post, no control group	17.08 to 12.42
Guan et al. 2023change in age-standardised incidence rate	TBI, 1990 to 2019	-5.5%	95% UI -8.9 to -3.0
Theadom et al. 2023mean violent charges	single mTBI vs orthopaedic control, p<0.01	0.26 vs 0.21
Theadom et al. 2023mean violent charges, multiple mTBI	multiple mTBI vs orthopaedic control, p<0.05	0.57 vs 0.24
Parrott et al. 2022relative risk of return to incarceration within 1 year	moderate-to-severe TBI vs no TBI, IDOC sample	~2-fold
Wong et al. 2022regression estimate	post-concussion physical symptom severity, IPV-related mild TBI vs no mild TBI	18.7	10.9 to 26.6
Wong et al. 2022regression estimate	SF-36 Mental Component Summary, IPV-related mild TBI vs no mild TBI	-7.9	-13.8 to -2.1
Bogner et al. 2021proportion resumed alcohol use by 12 months	adapted SBI vs screening and education with attention control	32% (adapted SBI) vs 62% (control)	p<.05
Brandt et al. 2021BRIEF Behavioral Regulation Index, estimated difference	pGMT vs pBHW at 6 months	-2.3	95% CI -5.1 to 0.6
Mitchell et al. 2021eta squared, calming/distraction subscale	intervention vs wait-list control, post-intervention	0.11
Schneider et al. 2021relative TBI rate vs general population	incarcerated adults vs general population	approximately 5-fold
da Silva Ramos et al. 2020sensitivity	BISI vs available medical records	0.38-0.71
da Silva Ramos et al. 2020specificity	BISI vs available medical records	0.47-0.70
Jewell et al. 2020odds ratio, schizophrenia and mortality	local death tracing vs HES-ONS linkage	1.08 (gold standard) vs 1.05 (HES-ONS linked)	95% CI 1.01-1.15 vs 0.98-1.13
Linden et al. 2020mean difference, behavioural control score, offenders vs controls (both with TBI)	young offenders vs university-based controls, both TBI-positive subgroups	14.68 points	95% CI -19.08 to -11.76
Linden et al. 2020mean difference, aggression score, offenders vs controls (both with TBI)	young offenders vs university-based controls, both TBI-positive subgroups	31.80 points	95% CI -38.31 to -27.17
Linden et al. 2020behavioural control (mean, offenders vs controls with TBI)	offenders with TBI vs comparison group	66.01 vs 51.33	95% CI -19.08 to -11.76
Linden et al. 2020aggression (mean, offenders vs controls with TBI)	offenders with TBI vs comparison group	101.19 vs 69.39	95% CI -38.31 to -27.17
Linden et al. 2020mean difference, behavioural control	offenders with TBI vs university controls with TBI	66.01 vs 51.33	-19.08 to -11.76
Linden et al. 2020mean difference, aggression	offenders with TBI vs university controls with TBI	101.19 vs 69.39	-38.31 to -27.17
GBD 2016 Traumatic Brain Injury and Spinal Cord Injury Collaborators 2019age-standardised incidence rate	global TBI, 2016	369 per 100,000	95% UI 331-412
Marincowitz et al. 2019change in monthly mortality rate	16-64 age group, after second NICE guideline introduction	-0.005	95% CI -0.002 to -0.007
Pitman et al. 2015correlation	BISI screening results vs self-report neurobehavioural questionnaires	.31 to .50
Pitman et al. 2015correlation	BISI screening results vs neuropsychological measures	−.24 to −.45
Pitman et al. 2015correlation	TBI Index vs formal neuropsychological tests	−.20 to −.42
Radford et al. 2013return to work rate	TBI vocational rehabilitation vs usual care, 12 months	75% vs 60%
Donnelly et al. 2011diagnostic odds ratio	VATBIST accuracy with and without comorbid PTSD	12.6 (full sample) to 24 (PTSD excluded)
Guerrero et al. 2000incidence rate	vs 216 per 100,000 per year, 1991 estimate	392 per 100,000 per year

---

Each value is copied from the record's reported effects, which in turn quote the source. A row's study link opens the full record, with the finding in context, the limitations as stated and, where the finding is contested, who disputes it. Effect sizes recorded without an interval are counted in the methodology's register of what the review does not yet meet.