MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161205332 · doi:10.1177/1049732310377454

I am Many: The Reconstruction of Self Following Acquired Brain Injury

2010· article· en· W2161205332 on OpenAlexaff
Jan Gelech, Michel Desjardins

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Health Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonhoodThematic analysisPerspective (graphical)SelfTranscendence (philosophy)PsychologyNegotiationResistance (ecology)Traumatic brain injuryAcquired brain injuryPsychoanalysisQualitative researchPsychotherapistSociologyEpistemologySocial psychologyRehabilitationNeuroscienceSocial sciencePhilosophyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we examine the construction of self following acquired brain injury from an experience-centered perspective. Life history and semistructured interview transcripts collected from four brain injury survivors were analyzed using thematic, syntactic, and deep structure analysis. Though notions of the "lost" or "shattered" self have dominated discussions of personhood in the acquired brain injury literature, we argue that this perspective is a crude representation of the postinjury experience of self, and that aspects of stability, recovery, transcendence, and moral growth are also involved in this process. We highlight the intersubjective nature of the self, and present the processes of delegitimation, invalidation, negotiation, and resistance as crucial aspects of the postinjury construction of personhood. We explore the implications of this complex process of construction of self for grief and bereavement theories, clinical practice, and professional discourse in the area of acquired brain injury.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.267
GPT teacher head0.591
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations71
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative Health ResearchSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207