The Importance of Trauma-Informed Care: A Call to Action for Physical Therapist Practice, Education, Research, and Advocacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trauma exposure is associated with a host of biopsychosocial effects, including premature mortality, compromised physical/mental health, substance misuse, and addiction; 90% of American adults report at least one significant lifetime traumatic incident. Disparate trauma exposure among people with physical disabilities, lower socioeconomic status, rural residence, and/or racial/ethnic minority status creates a strong rationale supporting trauma-informed care (TIC) in promoting health equity. Although physical therapist (PT) practice, education, and research do not routinely integrate TIC, public health needs and the opportunity to advance health equity compel greater professional involvement in addressing trauma and its impact on overall wellness. This perspective describes (1) the biopsychosocial impact of trauma; (2) screening and assessment of trauma exposure and its impact; (3) TIC in physical therapy practice; (4) the impact of unaddressed trauma; and 5) TIC in physical therapy education, research, and advocacy. Physical therapy professionals should apply this information to address the gap in trauma-informed care for individuals, families, groups, and communities.
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 | 0.087 | 0.138 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.030 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.031 |
| Research integrity | 0.038 | 0.081 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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".