Feasibility of an Intergenerational Program Supporting Healthy Aging for People Living With Traumatic Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Individuals living with traumatic brain injury (TBI) experience barriers to social participation, limiting healthy aging. While intergenerational programs may offer a solution, their feasibility with the TBI population remains unexplored. Using a community-engaged approach, we co-developed and delivered an intergenerational TBI program in a community organization dedicated to TBI health promotion. Intergenerational dyads (n = 8) partnered with professional photographers over seven structured sessions, sharing their thoughts or experiences about aging with disability, while turning words into art. The program culminated in a traveling art exhibition, launched at a national museum. Objectives (1) To explore perceived program impacts, and (2) to assess feasibility and acceptability. Method Post-intervention, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 TBI participants, a community worker, and the director, using a qualitative descriptive design guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Data were analyzed with mixed methods and reported per the COREQ checklist. Results TBI dyad participants experienced greater social participation, felt more valued and empowered, and perceived increased public awareness of their realities. The program reached TBI members who had not been involved with the organization before, creating opportunities for meaningful social connections. Participants valued and supported the program, but improving its flexibility to diverse participants’ abilities would enhance its feasibility. Conclusion Co-creating and delivering inclusive health promotion initiatives like an art-based intergenerational program for individuals living with TBI is feasible and can promote social connection, participation and healthy aging.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".