Exploring the experiences of youth with persistent post-concussion symptoms and their families with an interprofessional team-based assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A proportion of youth who experience concussion develop persistent or prolonged post-concussion symptoms (PPCS). Owing to the complex clinical presentation of PPCS, an interprofessional approach to care is increasingly recommended. Despite increased research in this area, there remains a dearth of evidence from the perspective of the recipients of interprofessional concussion care. The objective of this qualitative descriptive study was to explore the experiences of youth with PPCS and their parents who participated in an interdisciplinary team-based assessment (ITA) at a children’s rehabilitation hospital in Ontario, Canada. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with fifteen individuals (eight youth [8–17 years] and seven parents). Results suggest that the ITA serves as a context for meaningful therapeutic interactions whereby youth, their parents, and the interprofessional team establish and build therapeutic relationships, engage in dialogue emphasizing collaboration, prioritize the young person rather than the injury, and co-create an individualized treatment plan. Results are discussed within the broader literature in the areas of client and family-centered care, interdisciplinary assessment, and concussion management.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| 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".