The insular cortex, a critical hub in the brain’s sensory, cognitive, and emotional networks, remains an intriguing subject of study. In this article, we discuss its intricate functional neuroanatomy, emphasizing its pivotal role in processing olfactory information. Through concise exploration, we delve into the insula’s diverse connectivity and its involvement in sensory integration, particularly in olfaction. Stimulation studies in humans reveal compelling insights into the insula’s contribution to the perception of smell, hinting at its broader implications for cognitive processing. Additionally, we explore an avenue of research in which studying olfactory processing via insular stimulation could unravel higher-level cognitive processes. This innovative approach could help give a fresh perspective on the interplay between sensory and cognitive domains, offering valuable insights into the neural mechanisms underlying cognition and emotion. In conclusion, future research efforts should emphasize a multidisciplinary approach, combining advanced imaging and surgical techniques to explore the intricate functions of the human insula. Moreover, awake craniotomies could offer a unique opportunity for real-time observation, shedding light on its neural circuitry and contributions to higher-order brain functions. Furthermore, olfaction’s direct cortical projection enables precise exploration of insular function, promising insights into cognitive and emotional processes. This multifaceted approach will deepen our understanding of the insular cortex and its significance in human cognition and emotion.

Objective: To evaluate predictors of performance validity testing (PVT) and clinical outcome in patients presenting to a specialty clinic with a mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Setting: An outpatient mTBI specialty clinic. Participants: Seventy-six (47% female) patients aged 16 to 66 (mean = 40.58, SD = 14.18) years within 3 to 433 days (mean = 30.63, SD = 54.88, median = 17.00) of a suspected mTBI between 2018 and 2019. Design: A cross-sectional, observational study comparing patients who passed PVT (n = 43) with those who failed (n = 33). A logistic regression (LR) was conducted to evaluate factors that predicted failed PVT. Independent-samples t tests and general linear model were used to evaluate PVT groups on clinical outcomes. The LR with a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was conducted to evaluate embedded validity indicators. Main Measures: Performance validity testing, computerized neurocognitive testing, vestibular/oculomotor screening, symptom reports. Results: At their initial clinic visit 43% of patients failed PVT. PVT failure was predicted by presence of secondary gain (odds ratio [OR] = 8.11, P = .02), while a history of mental health predicted passing of PVT (OR = 0.29, P = .08). Those who failed PVT performed significantly worse on computerized neurocognitive testing (P < .05) and took an average of 33 days longer to return to work (P = .02). There was no significant difference (P = .20) in recovery time between failed/passed PVT groups when covarying for those who sustained a work injury. Word memory learning percentage less than 69% and design memory learning percentage less than 50% accurately classified patients who failed PVT (area under the ROC curve = 0.74; P < .001). Conclusion: Secondary gain was the best predictor of failed PVT. Patients presenting for mTBI evaluation and rehabilitation who fail PVT demonstrate worse performance on cognitive testing and take longer to return to work post-injury, but recover in a similar time frame compared with those who pass PVT. Clinicians should be cautious in discounting patients who yield invalid test results, as these patients appear to be able to achieve recovery in a treatment setting.

The goal of the current study was to determine which sport/recreation-related concussion (SRC) assessments predict academic reading performance following SRC. The study included 70 concussed students aged 14–22 years (M = 16.21, SD = 1.90) evaluated 2–30 days (M = 8.41, SD = 5.88) post-injury. SRC assessments included: Post-Concussion Symptom Scale, Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing, Vestibular/Ocular Motor Screening, and King-Devick test. The Nelson-Denny Reading Test (NDRT) comprehension subtest measured academic reading accuracy and rate. Pearson correlations examined relationships among SRC assessments and reading accuracy/rate; those assessments that significantly correlated with the NDRT were included in multiple regressions (MRs) predicting reading accuracy and reading rate. Results supported positive correlations between visual motor speed and reading accuracy (r = .31, p = .01), and near point of convergence (NPC) and reading rate (r = .30, p = .01). The MRs for reading accuracy (F = 4.61, p = .01) and reading rate (F = 4.61, p = .01) were significant, and predicted approximately 40% of the variance, with visual motor speed and NPC as the only significant predictors in both models. Symptoms were not predictive of reading accuracy or rate. The present study indicates that visual motor speed and NPC are predictive of academic reading performance after SRC, suggesting clinicians should consider these clinical outcomes to better inform academic accommodations.

There are few guidelines on the appropriate clinical tools to evaluate mTBI in older adults. We aimed to investigate the utility of a multidomain assessment to differentiate older adults with mTBI from controls. Participants included 68 older adults (37% male) aged 60-76 (M = 66.24, SD = 4.50) years. Thirty-four patients were diagnosed with a mTBI at a specialty mTBI clinic within 90 days of injury, and age- and sex-matched to 34 community controls. Participants completed the following assessments: Post-Concussion Symptom Scale (PCSS), Short Fall Efficacy Scale-International (Short FES-I), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 Item Scale (GAD-7), Geriatric Depression Scale-5 Item (GDS-5), Wide Range Achievement Test-Fourth Edition (WRAT-4) reading subtest, subtests of the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), clock drawing, and Vestibular/Ocular Motor Screening for Concussion (VOMS). Independent-samples t-tests or chi-squared analyses were used to compare assessment results between groups. A logistic regression (LR) was conducted to determine which combination of assessments best identified the mTBI group from controls. The mTBI group endorsed significantly more symptoms of concussion (p < .001), balance concerns (p < .001), anxiety (p < .001), and depression (p = 0.04), and performed worse on cognitive (p < .001), vestibular (p < .001), and oculomotor (p = .004) screening relative to controls. The LR (p < .001; r² = 0.90) correctly identified 98.5% of older adults and retained concussion (p = .01) and depression (p = .02) symptoms, and cognitive (p = .03) and vestibular (p = .04) screening in the final model. The current findings support a multidomain assessment model of care for evaluating mTBI in older adults.

Athletes with recent concussion experience a constellation of physical (e.g., headache, nausea), cognitive (e.g., memory problems, difficulty concentrating), sleep, and emotional (e.g., anxiety, depressed mood) symptoms after injury. Mental health changes may also be a product of typical maturation in adolescents/young adults, making mood disruption difficult to disentangle from concussion sequelae. In this case study, we present the case of a high-achieving 18-year-old female rower whose concussion clinical trajectory exhibits this type of difficulty. Specifically, we provide a detailed chronological summary of the athlete’s visits with a multidisciplinary concussion team. We highlight in this case study (a) an individualized, biopsychosocial model of concussion care and (b) subtle aspects of her clinical presentation that led the clinical team to transition her treatment focus from concussion specific to formal mental health care.