Aphasia and acute care: a qualitative study of family perspectives
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
Background The early acute phase of hospitalization after the onset of aphasia is typically a challenging and stressful time for caregivers and family members of people with aphasia. During this time, it is particularly important to provide support and relevant information to family to reduce psychological distress and increase the likelihood of longer-term positive outcomes. However, families of people with aphasia often report a lack of support and information within the acute care setting and a generally negative experience.Aims To gather information and insights into the acute care experiences of families of people with aphasia as an early step in a larger project. The larger project was designed to improve the acute care experience for people with aphasia, families, and healthcare staff in a community teaching hospital.Methods A qualitative investigation including text-based questionnaires and in-person focus groups was conducted with 16 family members of people with aphasia. Thematic analysis was completed to identify experiences in early acute care. An additional 7 family members served as “checkers” to validate that the derived themes were consistent with their own experiences during acute hospitalization of their family member with aphasia.Results Six themes were identified that described shared experiences of the participants. The themes (drawing from quotes of participants) include: “At first it’s just survival”; “There’s nothing for the family”; “They did not use the word aphasia at the beginning”; “They did not give me any information about it [how to communicate]”; “They did not really communicate with him [the person with aphasia]”; “They do not want to give you hope”. The themes were endorsed by the family checkers.Conclusions This initial phase of a larger project found that participating families of people with aphasia were not given sufficient support or information, contributing to a largely negative experience of the early acute phase of care.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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