Degree Date

6-2025

Document Type

Dissertation - NLU Access

Degree Name

Psy.D. Doctor of Clinical Psychology

Academic Discipline

Clinical Psychology

First Advisor

Sandra Zakowski, PhD

Second Advisor

Jamie Rehmel, PhD

Third Advisor

Dalia Manjarres Cohen, Psy D

Abstract

Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) has gained public attention due to increased awareness of its neurological and physical effects, especially among male athletes. This study investigated how healthcare providers diagnose mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) in male versus female patients by presenting 208 physicians with randomly assigned gender-based patient vignettes. Physicians rated the likelihood of mTBI based on symptoms in the vignette, showing no significant difference in diagnosis between the genders of the presented vignettes (female: M = 2.19, SD = 0.47; male: M = 2.17, SD = 0.51). Furthermore, likelihood ratings for other potential diagnoses revealed no gender-based differences, indicating that physicians assessed the likelihood of diagnoses similarly for male and female patients with comparable symptoms. The exploratory hypothesis examined whether the demographics of the healthcare raters interacted with patient gender in diagnostic ratings. The findings suggest that neither gender nor experience level had a measurable impact on diagnostic likelihood decision-making. The study discusses implications and recommendations for future research.

Comments

Table of Contents

Abstract……………………………………………………………………….………….….……1

Introduction…...…………………………………………………………….……………...…….2

Literature Review………………………..…………………….…………………….…….…….2

Defining a Traumatic Brain Injury…….………………………...…….………………………..3

Classifications of Traumatic brain injury ……..……………… …..………………………..….3

Symptoms of a Traumatic Brain Injury……………...…………… …………………….…….5

Statistics on Who Suffers a Traumatic Brain Injury.……………………………………………......6

Gender Differences in Mild TraumaticBrain Injuries…………………………….……………7

Gender Bias in Medical Diagnosis… …….….……….…………………………………......14

Summary……...…………………………………………………………………………………18

Study Hypothesis …….………………………………….…………………….…………….….18

Method ……………. ………..………...……………………………………………………….………….19

Design……………………………….…………………………………………………………...19

Participants………………………………………………………….……………………….…19

Measures…………………………..………...………………………………………………..…20

Vignette Questions…………...……………………………………….………………...20

Questions Regarding Medical Expertise ………………………………..…………....20

Procedure.….……………...…………………………………………………………………….21

Data Analyses…...……………………………………………………………………….22

Results………………………………………………………………………...…………………22

Interaction of Healthcare Professional's Rater’s Gender with Vignette Patient Gender on Likelihood Diagnosis…………………………………..……………………….………….….27

Interaction of Years of Experience by Vignette Patient Gender on Likelihood

Diagnosis …………………………………………………….……………………………..….28

Discussion…………………………………………………………………………………...….29

Limitations……………………………………………………………………….…………….31

Future Research……………………………………………………………………………….33

Conclusion…………………………………………..………………………………………….35

References………………………..……………………………………………………………..37

Appendix A: Participant Recruitment via Facebook Post…………………………………..43

Appendix B: Informed Consent …………………………………………………………........44

Appendix C: Demographics Questionnaire. ……………………………...………………….46

Appendix D: Vignette……………………..…………………………………………….….... ..48

Appendix E: Diagnoses …………………………………………..………………………….....49

Appendix F: Follow-Up Questionnaire……………………………………………………......51

Share

COinS