Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T04:13:45.727Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Commentary

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Peter Eames
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Article Commentary
Information
Advances in Psychiatric Treatment , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , July 1999 , pp. 258 - 260
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal College of Psychiatrists 1999 

References

Ashley, M. J., Persel, C. S., Clark, M. C. et al (1997) Long-term follow-up of post-acute traumatic brain injury rehabilitation: a statistical analysis to test for stability and predictability of outcome. Brain Injury, 11, 677–690.Google Scholar
Eames, P. (1989) Risk–benefit considerations in drug treatment. In Models of Brain Injury Rehabilitation (eds Wood, R. L. & Eames, P.) pp. 164–179. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Eames, P. & Wood, R. (1985) Rehabilitation after severe brain injury: a follow-up study of a behaviour modification approach. Journal of Neurological and Neurosurgical Psychiatry, 48, 613–619.Google Scholar
Eames, P. & Papakostopoulos, D. (1990) Crying and laughing after brain damage. Journal of Neurological and Neurosurgical Psychiatry, 53, 1111.Google Scholar
Eames, P., Cotterill, G., Kneale, T. A. et al (1996) Outcome of intensive rehabilitation after severe brain injury: a follow-up study. Brain Injury, 10, 631–650.Google Scholar
Evans, C. (1989) Long-term follow-up. In Models of Brain Injury Rehabilitation (eds Wood, R. L. & Eames, P.) pp. 183–204. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.