MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413976119 · doi:10.1097/htr.0000000000001097

Development and Evaluation of Sleep Disorder Decision Aids for Veterans With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

2025· article· en· W4413976119 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adam R. Kinney, Lisa A. Brenner, Morgan Nance, Audrey D. Cobb, Jeri E. Forster, Christi S. Ulmer, Risa Nakase‐Richardson, Constance H. Fung, Nazanin H. Bahraini

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUsabilityObstructive sleep apneaScale (ratio)Traumatic brain injuryPolytraumaMedical emergencyPsychiatryEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: First, to summarize the design of novel decision aid prototypes aimed at facilitating shared decision-making for Veterans with co-morbid mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and sleep disorders (insomnia, obstructive sleep apnea [OSA]) in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Polytrauma/TBI System of Care (PSC). Second, to elicit feedback regarding usability, acceptability, and feasibility of prototypes to inform future implementation. SETTING: Nationwide VHA PSC sites. PARTICIPANTS: Clinicians included VHA providers involved in the management of mTBI and/or sleep disorders in the VHA PSC ( n = 7). Veterans included those with a clinician-confirmed mTBI who received care for insomnia disorder and OSA within the past year ( n = 5). DESIGN: Convergent parallel mixed methods. MAIN MEASURES: Semi-structured interview guides; System Usability Scale; Ottawa Decision Aid Acceptability Scale. RESULTS: Participants found the decision aid prototypes easy to use, highlighting its accessibility and features enabling an easy comparison of treatments. However, participants recommended changes to simplify and improve the design. Decision aids were seen as acceptable, providing essential information for Veterans with mTBI and facilitating shared decision-making among providers, Veterans, and other decision partners (eg, spouse). Removal of non-essential content was recommended to increase acceptability. Decision aids were considered feasible to implement, though extending the decision-making process beyond the initial encounter and accounting for time constraints were recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight that the decision aids are easy-to-use, feasible to implement, and capable of improving Veteran-centered management of sleep disorders among those with mTBI. Nonetheless, clinicians and Veterans offered recommendations for changes that can improve the utility of the decision aids and facilitate their seamless integration into routine care for Veterans with co-morbid mTBI and sleep disorders. Findings lay the foundation for efforts aimed at implementing the decision aids into routine care for sleep disorders in the VHA PSC, aligning care decisions with Veteran preferences and improving outcomes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.346 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Head Trauma RehabilitationSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207