Traumatic Brain Injury and Sexuality: User Experience Study of an Information Toolkit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: After having sustained a traumatic brain injury (TBI), individuals are at risk of functional impairments in information processing, abstract reasoning, executive functioning, attention, and memory. This affects different aspects of communicative functioning. Specific strategies can be adopted to improve the provision of health information to individuals with TBI, including the development of written materials and nonwritten media. OBJECTIVE: A user-centered design was adopted to codevelop four audiovisual presentations, a double-sided information sheet, and a checklist aimed at informing individuals about post-TBI sexuality. The last phase of the project was the assessment of the user experience of the information toolkit, based on the User Experience Honeycomb model. METHODS: Overall, two small group discussions and one individual semistructured interview were conducted with individuals with moderate to severe TBI. RESULTS: The participants mentioned that the toolkit was easily usable and would have fulfilled a need for information on post-TBI sexuality during or after rehabilitation. They mostly agreed that the minimalist visual content was well-organized, attractive, and relevant. The information was easily located, the tools were accessible in terms of reading and visibility, and the content was also considered credible. CONCLUSIONS: Aspects such as usability, usefulness, desirability, accessibility, credibility, and findability of information were viewed positively by the participants. Further piloting of the toolkit is recommended to explore its effects on the awareness of the potential sexual repercussions of TBI in individuals and partners.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".