6 Thus, not only might the criteria for a complicated MTBI evolve to include smaller and smaller abnormalities—but some of these abnormalities might not be related to the MTBI—thus resulting in misdiagnosis. In conclusion, patients with complicated MTBIs took longer to return to work. They did not, however, perform more poorly on neurocognitive measures or report more symptoms, at 3-4 weeks after injury compared to those with uncomplicated MTBIs. As the literature evolves, it is be- coming clear that complicated MTBIs represent a broad spectrum of injury, with some people having very small ab- normalities and excellent functional outcome, other people requiring inpatient rehabilitation and having poor outcome, and a diverse set of outcomes in between. Acknowledgments This research was funded by Competitive Research Funding of the Pirkanmaa Hospital District, Tampere University Hos- pital. The authors thank Pasi Jolma (M.D., Ph.D.) for help with recruiting the patients and conducting neurological ex- aminations. This study was presented at the annual meeting of the National Academy of Neuropsychology, October 2010, Vancouver, BC, Canada. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not reﬂect the oﬃcial policy of the Department of Army, Department of Defense, or US Government. References [1] D. H. Williams, H. S. Levin, and H. M. Eisenberg, “Mild head injury classiﬁcation,” Neurosurgery, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 422–428, 1990. [2] R. T. Lange, G. L. Iverson, M. J. Zakrzewski, P. E. Ethel- King, and M. D. Franzen, “Interpreting the trail making test following traumatic brain injury: comparison of traditional time scores and derived indices,” Journal of Clinical and Experi- mental Neuropsychology, vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 897–906, 2005. [3] G. L. Iverson, M. D. Franzen, and M. R. Lovell, “Normative comparisons for the controlled oral word association test following acute traumatic brain injury,” Clinical Neuropsychol- ogist, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 437–441, 1999. [4] G. Iverson, “Complicated vs uncomplicated mild traumatic brain injury: acute neuropsychological outcome,” Brain In- jury, vol. 20, no. 13-14, pp. 1335–1344, 2006. [5] S. R. Borgaro, G. P. Prigatano, C. Kwasnica, and J. L. Rexer, “Cognitive and aﬀective sequelae in complicated and uncom- plicated mild traumatic brain injury,” Brain Injury, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 189–198, 2003. [6] E. Kurca, S. Sivak, and P. Kucera, “Impaired cognitive func- tions in mild traumatic brain injury patients with normal and pathologic magnetic resonance imaging,” Neuroradiology, vol. 48, no. 9, pp. 661–669, 2006. [7] P. A. M. Hofman, S. Z. Stapert, M. J. P. G. Van Kroonenburgh, J. Jolles, J. De Kruijk, and J. T. Wilmink, “MR imaging, single- photon emission CT, and neurocognitive performance after mild traumatic brain injury,” American Journal of Neuroradi- ology, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 441–449, 2001. [8] R. E. Hanlon, J. A. Demery, Z. Martinovich, and J. P. Kelly, “Eﬀects of acute injury characteristics on neuropsychological Rehabilitation Research and Practice status and vocational outcome following mild traumatic brain injury,” Brain Injury, vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 873–887, 1999. [9] R. T. Lange, G. Iverson, and M. D. Franzen, “Neuropsychologi- cal functioning following complicated vs. uncomplicated mild traumatic brain injury,” Brain Injury, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 83–91, 2009. [10] J. van der Naalt, J. M. Hew, A. H. van Zomeren, W. J. Sluiter, and J. M. Minderhoud, “Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in mild to moderate head injury: early and late imaging related to outcome,” Annals of Neurology, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 70–78, 1999. [11] J. T. L. Wilson, D. M. Hadley, L. C. Scott, and A. Harper, “Neu- ropsychological signiﬁcance of contusional lesions identiﬁed by MRI,” in Recovery after Traumatic Brain Injury, B. P. Uzzell and H. H. Stonnington, Eds., pp. 29–50, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahway, NJ, USA, 1996. [12] N. R. Temkin, J. E. Machamer, and S. S. Dikmen, “Correlates of functional status 3–5 years after traumatic brain injury with CT abnormalities,” Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 229–241, 2003. [13] S. R. McCauley, C. Boake, H. S. Levin, C. F. Contant, and J. X. Song, “Postconcussional disorder following mild to moderate traumatic brain injury: anxiety, depression, and social support as risk factors and comorbidities,” Journal of Clinical and Ex- perimental Neuropsychology, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 792–808, 2001. [14] H. Lee, M. Wintermark, A. D. Gean, J. Ghajar, G. T. Manley, and P. Mukherjee, “Focal lesions in acute mild traumatic brain injury and neurocognitive outcome: CT versus 3T MRI,” Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 1049–1056, 2008. [15] N. S. King, S. Crawford, F. J. Wenden, N. E. G. Moss, and D. T. Wade, “The Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Question- naire: a measure of symptoms commonly experienced after head injury and its reliability,” Journal of Neurology, vol. 242, no. 9, pp. 587–592, 1995. [16] A. T. Beck, R. A. Steer, and G. K. Brown, Manual for the Beck Depression Inventory-II (Finnish version), The Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, Tex, USA, 1996. [17] S. R. Borgaro, S. Gierok, H. Caples, and C. Kwasnica, “Fatigue after brain injury: initial reliability study of the BNI Fatigue Scale,” Brain Injury, vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 685–690, 2004. [18] D. Wechsler, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, Tex, USA, 3rd edition, 1997. [19] M. D. Lezak, D. B. Howieson, and D. W. Loring, Neuropsy- chological Assessment, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA, 4th edition, 2004. [20] Army Individual Test Battery, Manual of Directions and Scor- ing, War Department, Adjutant General’s Oﬃce, Washigton, DC, USA, 1944. [21] O. Spreen and E. Strauss, A Compendium of Neuropsychological Tests, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA, 1991. [22] J. van der Naalt, A. H. van Zomeren, W. J. Sluiter, and J. M. Minderhoud, “One year outcome in mild to moderate head injury: the predictive value of acute injury characteristics relat- ed to complaints and return to work,” Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 207–213, 1999. [23] C. Denk and A. Rauscher, “Susceptibility weighted imaging with multiple echoes,” Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 185–191, 2010. [24] A. Rauscher, M. Barth, K. H. Herrmann, S. Witoszynskyj, A. Deistung, and J. R. Reichenbach, “Improved elimination of phase eﬀects from background ﬁeld inhomogeneities for susceptibility weighted imaging at high magnetic ﬁeld strengths,” Magnetic Resonance Imaging, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 1145–1151, 2008.