This project addresses two issues: traumatic brain injury and the court system. As always, a clear understanding of the situation is necessary to help guide the analysis. The following collection of Head Injury Factoids provides some statistics on brain injury to set the stage for the following analysis.
Brain injury is one aspect of the problem: another important aspect involves the court system. In the report called Brain Injury and Proving Lifetime Impairment in Dollars, from the Alexander Law Firm, you will discover some of the obstacles which people face when they enter the world of litigation. The report gives an overview of the issues facing people who have sustained a brain injury when they enter the court system and are seeking monetary restitution.
Researchers are human beings, and they have human beliefs that can effect their analysis. Before beginning this analysis, it is good to recognize that we often have beliefs, (based on stories from friends, coworkers, and the popular media) about the court system. Sometimes our beliefs are not accurate: this report addresses what the authors believe are Myths About Jury Awards. This is an important concept for the statistician because we are concerned with understanding the general situation, and not on particular cases or 'anecdotal evidence'.
The study you will examine in this section was carried out to investigate a number of aspects affecting the recovery of people who have received head injuries and are awaiting the results of litigation. The data appears courtesy of Professor J. Chaseling, Griffiths University, Brisbane Australia.
One particular aspect of concern was the effect of pending litigation and the accompanying court cases on the time taken to return to the previous level of mental performance; that is, to the level of mental facility before the accident which caused the head injury.
The study took place over twenty years and involved patients from all states in Australia. Although the times and locations are different, this particular aspect of the study was concerned with general relationships overall. The patient's age was considered to be important and each patient has been classified into one of 5 groups:
For this particular analysis, random samples have been obtained from each of the defined age groups and litigation classes.