Men’s gendered experiences of rehabilitation and recovery following traumatic brain injury: A reflexive thematic analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research shows that gender influences men’s health-related beliefs and behaviours – including those within the context of traumatic brain injury (TBI) – making it a factor that should be considered when designing and implementing interventions for this population. To incorporate an understanding of such gendered influences in future educational materials for men with TBI, as well as their caregivers and clinicians, this qualitative study was informed by social constructionism, and aimed to explore how gender is related to men’s post-TBI perceptions and behaviours in rehabilitation and recovery. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 men with mild and moderate-severe TBI at the acute (≤ 3 months post-TBI) and chronic (> 3 months post-TBI) phases of injury. A reflexive thematic analysis approach was applied to interview data, guided by the concept of hegemonic masculinity as described by Connell, R.W. (2005. Masculinities [2nd ed.]. Polity). Three key themes were identified: (1) “I’m a man, I’m a rock”: Undermining treatment, (2) “I’m going to face that challenge”: Facilitation of recovery, and (3) “I don’t feel as useful as a guy as I was before”: Perceptions on return to work. These findings may be translated into gender-informed therapy strategies and materials.
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.
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 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it