MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A thematic analysis of patients’ and their informal caregivers’ gendered experiences in traumatic brain injury

2022· article· en· W6977413384 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversité LavalUniversity of TorontoCentre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Chaudière-Appalaches
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisTraumatic brain injuryQualitative researchTransformative learningPerceptionRehabilitationIntervention (counseling)Diversity (politics)Quality of life (healthcare)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research shows that patients’ perceptions of themselves and others, in addition to their understanding of the concept of gender, changes after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Little is known about gendered experiences in TBI and care delivery. This study aims to explore perceptions of gender through life experiences and interactions between adult patients with TBI and their informal caregivers. Seven patients with mild and moderate-severe TBI and eight informal caregivers were interviewed. Transcripts were coded and analysed according to Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research guidelines were followed in reporting results. The participants described a transformation of their understanding and experiences of gender following the TBI event. Three themes were identified: (1) Gender designations of "man" and "woman";( 2) Post-injury performativity of gender; and (3) Gender in giving and receiving care. The findings emphasize the importance of raising awareness among researchers and practitioners on gender as a transformative process for patients with TBI and informal caregivers after the injury. The diversity of patient-caregiver experiences and critical needs based on gender call for intervention approaches that mitigate gender disparities in giving and receiving care. Implications for RehabilitationHistorically, rehabilitation of persons with traumatic brain injury has targeted physical and cognitive impairments, with little attention to their gendered demands in the lived environment.Gender prevails in the lived experiences of persons with traumatic brain injury, and their informal caregivers, and in giving and receiving quality care.A major challenge for clinicians is identifying harmful gendered roles, norms, and relations and the affective/behavioral problems they produce to alleviate enduring distress and reduce disability.Rehabilitation interventions focusing on flexible and adaptive responses to gendered demands in the lived environment of persons with traumatic brain injury are timely. Historically, rehabilitation of persons with traumatic brain injury has targeted physical and cognitive impairments, with little attention to their gendered demands in the lived environment. Gender prevails in the lived experiences of persons with traumatic brain injury, and their informal caregivers, and in giving and receiving quality care. A major challenge for clinicians is identifying harmful gendered roles, norms, and relations and the affective/behavioral problems they produce to alleviate enduring distress and reduce disability. Rehabilitation interventions focusing on flexible and adaptive responses to gendered demands in the lived environment of persons with traumatic brain injury are timely.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0100.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→