ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes2025
Patient Experiences of and Priorities for Traumatic Brain Injury Health Care in a US Level 1 Trauma Center: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Living with the aftermath: family experiences of managing concussion and sport-related head injury.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- "Burying the proud part of my body": a Chinese student-athlete's autoethnography from concussion recovery to role exit.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Use of In-Hospital Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Symptom Checklist Within 24 Hours of Injury to Predict 3-Month Symptom Outcome.The Journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To learn patient perspectives about health care in a level I trauma center for traumatic brain injury (TBI) that inform the design of better TBI systems of care. Patients and Methods: This was a community-engaged qualitative study that enrolled 42 individuals who had been either treated and discharged home from a level I trauma center emergency department (n=21, 50%) or who were admitted to the trauma center inpatient units (n=21, 50%). Interviews, conducted from August 12, 2022, to September 22, 2023, inquired about injury, post-acute and after post-acute care, clinical and community supports received, unexpected experiences, and things that helped or hurt access to care and outcome. Thematic analyses were completed in October 2024. Results: Four themes emerged. Participants conveyed a desire to be informed and engaged in their health and health care, reporting deficiencies, for example, in health care providers' explanation of their TBI diagnosis, communication about in-hospital care, and discharge instructions. They reported varied difficulties navigating the health care system after discharge, resulting in no or insufficient TBI follow-up care. Third, responses illuminated the importance of social risk and resilience factors, with particularly important roles of financial strain and social support. Fourth, participants conveyed unique feelings of vulnerability and uncertainty about TBI resulting from its variable, uncertain course. Conclusion: The findings align with and expand on findings from quantitative studies of common gaps in TBI care, whereas illuminating distinct targets for ongoing national and international efforts to develop more coordinated, patient-centered systems of care.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.