Veteran resilience following combat-related amputation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Amputation following combat-related injury places substantial stress on survivors and their spouses. The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of combat-related amputation among military Veterans and explore pathways to resilient behaviours. Methods: This qualitative study used a purposeful sample of male US military Veterans and their partners. We used the Metatheory of Resilience and Resiliency (MRR) as a conceptual framework for understanding the drives that promote growth through adversity and disruptions. MRR was also used to characterize each Veterans’ state of resilience after the amputation. Results: The majority of Veterans returned to their baseline level of functioning (reintegration back to homeostasis) and that some Veterans are functioning better than before the amputation (resilient reintegration). Discussion: Veterans who appear to have built a life post-amputation exhibited the following resilience drives: finding perspective and purpose (universal resilience), living consistent with one’s values and character strengths (character resilience), and accessing positive social support (ecological resilience). Practitioners should be alert to these themes among Veterans with traumatic amputation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".