Spinal Cord Injury Veterans’ Disability Benefits, Outcomes, and Health Care Utilization Patterns: Protocol for a Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An estimated 42,000 people currently living with chronic spinal cord injury (SCI) are veterans. SCI was a common combat-related injury in the World Wars and Vietnam era and now affects more than 11% of military personnel injured in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. The Veterans Benefits Administration primarily offers financial compensation for disabilities sustained or re-aggravated during military service, called service-connected disability compensation. With the overwhelming cost of living with an SCI, this monthly financial compensation can provide service-connected veterans and their families with access to additional supportive resources (eg, assistive devices and personal aide) and maintain their quality of life (QOL). Little is known about personal, health, functional, and QOL outcomes associated with service-connected and nonservice-connected status for veterans living with an SCI. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the ways in which Veterans Affairs' (VA) service-connected and nonservice-connected status may be associated with health and functional outcomes, choice of health care provider, and overall QOL for veterans living with an SCI and their caregivers. METHODS: This cross-sectional qualitative study will gather data using retrospective chart reviews, semistructured interviews, and focus groups. After obtaining institutional review board (IRB) approval, purposeful sampling techniques will be used to recruit and enroll the following key stakeholders: veterans living with an SCI, family caregivers, and SCI health care providers. Concurrent data collection will take place at 2 sites: Veterans Administration New Jersey Healthcare System and Northern New Jersey Spinal Cord Injury System. RESULTS: This study was funded in July 2015. IRB approval was obtained by November 2016 at both sites. Enrollment and data collection for phase 1 to phase 4 are complete. A total of 69 veterans, 18 caregivers, and 19 SCI clinicians enrolled in the study. Data analyses for these phases are underway. In phase 5, the follow-up focus group activities are scheduled. The final results are expected by the end of 2019. CONCLUSIONS: The factors that contribute to veterans living with SCI seeking and not seeking VA disability compensation benefits are not well understood in rehabilitation research. Triangulation of these data sources will allow us to compare, contrast, and integrate the results, which can be used to develop clinical guidelines, caregiver training, and patient education programs. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/14039.
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 | 0.056 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.053 | 0.006 |
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".