How does it feel to be helped using minimal cognitive assistance following a traumatic brain injury?
Mireille Gagnon-Roy, Nathalie Bier, Frédérique Poncet and 3 others
Five adults with TBI described how they experienced a therapist's minimal prompting during meal prep.
They generally liked being given time to think before getting more direct help. This is what 5 people said after two sessions, not proof the approach improves function.
Key findings
1All five participants described generally appreciating the progressive, minimal style of assistance, particularly the opportunity to think and try before the therapist offered more explicit cues.
2Participants also reported that some assistance felt too abstract, unnecessary (reminding them of things they already knew), or insufficient to help them progress, and that more explicit, directive help was needed in harder moments.
3Most participants said they would accept this type of assistance from a family member or a technology, but several expressed doubt that a device could match the responsiveness of a person.
to read the rest of this summary — three full summaries a month, no card.
Already have an account?
What it does not show
Only five participants were included, all from one region of Canada, recruited through a convenience sample; the authors note they could not reach data saturation because of the heterogeneity of the group. Perceptions were based on only two sessions (one evaluation, one guided session); the authors acknowledge this may not reflect how the approach would feel over months of daily use. Interviews were not conducted immediately after the sessions, which the authors note may have reduced the accuracy of participants' recollections of their feelings. No validated interview guide was used for the perception interviews. Participants did not review or check the emerging themes, although the themes were validated by experts in TBI. All assistance was delivered by a person; the authors note the experience may differ if the same style of assistance were delivered by a technology.
Declared interests
The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Funding was provided by ONF-REPAR, the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR), and the Fonds de Recherche du Québec—Santé. The authors also note that certain sentences were entered into Co-Pilot for English review and a plain-language summary was generated with an AI tool, with outputs checked and confirmed by the authors.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →