Experiences of Children and Youth With Concussion: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Concussions are common among children and youth. To date, the pediatric concussion literature has focused on quantitative reports of the effects of concussion and return-to-activity guidelines. However, the subjective experiences of children and youth returning to occupations postconcussion have largely been ignored. An understanding of these experiences is critical to inform effective concussion management. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the experiences of children and youth returning to occupations after sustaining a concussion and the impacts on their future engagement in occupation. DESIGN: Qualitative interpretive description was used for data analysis and interpretation. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: Children and youth ages 11 to 18 yr from a cohort study were recruited to be interviewed about their experiences of engaging in occupations postconcussion. OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Interviews were conducted 3 to 24 mo postconcussion, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using interpretive description to identify themes. RESULTS: Eight children and youth (5 male, 3 female) were included. Analyses revealed three themes of the experiences of children and youth returning to occupations after concussion: diverse experiences of concussion, knowledge is key to concussion management, and concussions affect occupational engagement. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study highlights the importance of considering a person's needs to enable effective concussion treatment plans. The results suggest the need for an occupation-based framework to guide interventions in pediatric concussion management. What This Article Adds: Our findings indicate that children and youth report variable recovery patterns, a lack of knowledge about concussion recovery, and a negative effect of concussion on occupational engagement.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".