Acquired brain injury self-management programme: A pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: Traditional rehabilitation is not well suited to individuals with chronic mild symptoms following an acquired brain injury. To address this, this study adapted a supported self-management programme (SMP) for this population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential effectiveness of this novel SMP. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective case series with repeated measures. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Fifty-three participants with chronic mild symptoms following an acquired brain injury (primarily mild traumatic brain injury) completed an SMP. The intervention involved eight coaching sessions with each an occupational therapist and psychologist, carried out in the community and based on SMP principles. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure was administered at baseline, discharge and 3- and 9-month follow-up. This measure yielded scores for performance and satisfaction with daily functioning, covering the domains of self-care, productivity and leisure. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: A complete case analysis of programme completers revealed that participants' ratings of their occupational performance and satisfaction improved markedly between baseline and discharge from the SMP. This set of outcome measures remained stable between discharge and the two follow-up points. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that SMPs may improve daily functioning in individuals with chronic mild ABI symptoms. More methodologically robust clinical trials are warranted.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".