Characteristics and Concerns of Caregivers of Adults With Traumatic Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics of caregivers of adults with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and their concerns in the first months after community discharge of the TBI survivor. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data collected during a parallel-group randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 153 consecutively enrolled caregivers of adults with moderate to severe TBI discharged to the community following acute and/or rehabilitation care at a Level I trauma center with 71 caregivers in the treatment group identifying concerns as part of the intervention procedures. MAIN MEASURES: Caregiver demographics, caregiver-survivor relationship characteristics, caregiver activity changes, and concerns targeted by caregivers for education and problem-solving via biweekly phone calls. RESULTS: Thirty-nine percent of caregivers were spouses and 35% parents. Sixty-five percent lived in the same house as the survivor preinjury with 86% in touch daily to several times per week. Concerns targeted by more than one-third of caregivers related to managing their emotional adjustment, strategies for getting things done, managing survivor emotions and behaviors, and engaging in healthful habits. CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers of TBI survivors targeted personal concerns relating to their own emotional adjustment and participation as well as concerns relating to symptoms and recovery of the TBI survivor to address through education and problem-solving.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".