A thematic analysis of patients’ and their informal caregivers’ gendered experiences in traumatic brain injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Research shows that patients' perceptions of themselves and others, in addition to their understanding of the concept of gender, changes after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Little is known about gendered experiences in TBI and care delivery. This study aims to explore perceptions of gender through life experiences and interactions between adult patients with TBI and their informal caregivers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven patients with mild and moderate-severe TBI and eight informal caregivers were interviewed. Transcripts were coded and analysed according to Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research guidelines were followed in reporting results. RESULTS: . CONCLUSIONS: The findings emphasize the importance of raising awareness among researchers and practitioners on gender as a transformative process for patients with TBI and informal caregivers after the injury. The diversity of patient-caregiver experiences and critical needs based on gender call for intervention approaches that mitigate gender disparities in giving and receiving care. Implications for RehabilitationHistorically, rehabilitation of persons with traumatic brain injury has targeted physical and cognitive impairments, with little attention to their gendered demands in the lived environment.Gender prevails in the lived experiences of persons with traumatic brain injury, and their informal caregivers, and in giving and receiving quality care.A major challenge for clinicians is identifying harmful gendered roles, norms, and relations and the affective/behavioral problems they produce to alleviate enduring distress and reduce disability.Rehabilitation interventions focusing on flexible and adaptive responses to gendered demands in the lived environment of persons with traumatic brain injury are timely.
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 | 0.023 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".