Independence in managing one's finances after traumatic brain injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To establish whether the budgeting task of the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) Profile discriminates individuals with a traumatic brain injury (TBI) from healthy controls and to identify the nature of the observed difficulties. METHOD: This study tested 27 adults with moderate or severe TBI and 27 controls matched for age, sex and education on the budgeting task of the IADL Profile. The budgeting task is a complex real-world problem involving the preparation of a yearly budget for an individual living on a fixed income with the goal of saving money to purchase a car. MAIN RESULTS: The results showed that TBI subjects, the majority of whom had documented frontal lesions and/or diffuse axonal injury based on CT scan reports, were more likely than control subjects to experience difficulties on all task-related operations (planning, carrying out and verifying attainment of goal), with planning being particularly affected. These deficits were shown to impact on financial abilities, an issue of particular concern for TBI individuals reporting full responsibility of their finances. CONCLUSIONS: The budgeting task of the IADL Profile discriminates TBI subjects from controls. Planning was shown to be the most significant difficulty underlying reduced independence in the task.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".