The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine the validity of claimed stressors and whether the veteran suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder. The Board also notes that further examination is required to assess any additional disability resulting from VA medical treatment.
The deciding factor: Additional development is necessary due to conflicting information regarding the existence and nature of claimed stressors, as well as potential complications arising from VA medical treatment.
- Claimed conditions
- post-traumatic stress disorder, decubitus ulceration, blockage of stoma
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- April 19, 2001
- Citation
- 0111398
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0111398.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims of service connection for irritable bowel syndrome, sleep apnea, post-traumatic stress disorder, and urinary frequency as there is no competent evidence linking these conditions to his military service.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of non-VA medical services provided on September 2, 2020 was denied under 38 U.S.C. § 1725 and 38 U.S.C. § 1728 due to lack of evidence in the file. The Board finds that remand is warranted for correction of errors in notice.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the AOJ's decision denying eligibility for the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is not supported by adequate reasoning and must be remanded to allow for a thorough review, including obtaining medical opinions on whether it is in the best interest of the Veteran to participate in the PCAFC program.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's claims for service connection and special monthly compensation based on housebound criteria were granted, effective September 22, 2009.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.