MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132924349

Traumatic Brain Injury: Sex and Gender Considerations Relevant to Rehabilitation

2023· dissertation· W7132924349 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sara Hanafy

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2023
Typedissertation
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersToronto Rehabilitation Institute
KeywordsPsychosocialRehabilitationTraumatic brain injuryMental healthQualitative researchRandomized controlled trialPsychological intervention
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a global cause of disability. Effects of TBI include cognitive, physical, and psychosocial disabilities. Although sex and gender considerations in research are considered important for good science, there is limited information on the extent to which sex and gender effects in TBI are recognized in rehabilitation. Further, the extent to which an educational tool targeted at persons with TBI and caregivers, can serve to improve knowledge, attitude, and skill on the topic for future integration within clinical practice has not been explored. Information is further lacking on differences in sex- and gender-based needs for men and women in the community specifically while transitioning to work and during the COVID-19 pandemic. As such, this thesis aimed to address these knowledge gaps by (1) understanding clinicians’ perspectives on the clinical impact of sex and gender in TBI rehabilitation, (2) exploring the effectiveness of education on sex and gender impacts in TBI for persons with TBI and caregivers, and (3) investigating differences in support service and workplace accommodation needs of men and women with TBI for transitioning into the community. The added impact of COVID-19 on employment status and mental health was also explored. The thesis was based on three studies. The first study, a qualitative descriptive design with semi-structured interviews with diverse rehabilitation clinicians highlighted limited attention on sex and gender topics in TBI rehabilitation and a need for resources that consider psychosocial factors. Results from the second study, a pilot pre-test/post-test randomized control-group trial revealed the potential for education to improve knowledge, attitudes, and skills on sex and gender effects in TBI, furthering the need for tools to help persons with TBI and caregivers address daily barriers post-injury. Finally results from the third study, an observational cross-sectional survey, demonstrated differences between men and women with TBI in transitioning to work and because of the pandemic, based on respective gender roles and behaviours. Findings from each study furthered the knowledge base on sex and gender considerations in TBI rehabilitation, with future attentions needed on developing sex- and gender-sensitive tools for clinical and non-clinical benefits.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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