Internet use and interest among individuals with traumatic brain injury: A consumer survey

Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology

Volumn 2, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 85-95

  Vaccaro, Monica ^a   Hart, Tessa ^b   Whyte, John ^b   Buchhofer, Regina ^a  

^a MOSS REHABILITATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Internet; traumatic brain injury

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BRAIN INJURY; COGNITIVE DEFECT; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; INTERNET; INTERVIEW; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SOCIOECONOMICS; UNITED STATES; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; BRAIN INJURIES; COGNITION DISORDERS; COMPUTER USER TRAINING; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNET; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 52449113156     PISSN: 17483107     EISSN: 17483115     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17483100601167586     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Chen W, Wellman B. Charting and bridging digital divides: Comparing socio-economic, gender, life stage, and rural-urban Internet access and use in eight countries. 2003, University of Toronto. Retrieved January 16, 2006 from http://www.amd. com/us-en/assets/content-type/DownloadableAssets/FINAL-REPORT- CHARTING-DIGI-DIVIDES.pdf
2. NUA Internet How Many Online. (n.d.) Retrieved January 16, 2006 from http://www.nua.com/surveys/how-many-online/n-america.html
3. Internet World Statistics (n.d.) Retrieved January 16.2006 from http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats2.htm
4. Kleiner A, Lewis L. Internet access in U.S. public schools and classrooms: 1994-2002. Retrieved January 16, 2006 from http://nces.ed.gov/ pubsearch/pubsinfo.asppubid1/42004011
5. HomeNet Project. (n.d.) Carnegie Mellon University, Retrieved January 16, 2006, from http://homente.hcii.cs. cmu.edu
6. Falling through the net: Defining the digital divide (2000). U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration: Washington, DC. Retrieved January 16, 2006, from http://www.ntia.gov/ntiahome/fttn00/contents.html
7. Kaye HS. Computer and Internet use among people with disabilities. Disability Statistics Report (13). Washington, DC, US Department of Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; 2000.
8. A Nation Online: How Americans are expanding their use of the Internet; 2002. US Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration, National Telecommunications and Information Administration. Retrieved January 16, 2006, from http://www.ntai.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/html/anationon line2.htm
9. Schopp LH. Design of a peer-to-peer telerehabilitation model. Telemed J E-Health 2004;10(2):243-251.
10. BarreraMJr, Glasgow RE, McKay G, Boles SM, Feil EG. Do internet-based support interventions change perceptions of social support? An experimental trial of approaches for supporting diabetes self-management. Am J Comm Psychol 2002;30(5):637-654.
11. Wright P. Text entry on handheld computers by older users. Ergonomics 2000;43(6):702-716.
12. Todis B, Sohlberg MM, Hood D, Fickas S. Making electronic mail accessible: Perspectives of people with acquired cognitive impairments, caregivers and professionals. Brain Injury 2005;19(6):389-401.
13. Sohlberg MM, Ehlhardt LA, Fickas S, Sutcliffe A. A pilot study exploring electronic (or e-mail) mail in users with acquired cognitive-linguistic impairments. Brain Injury 2003;17(7):609-629.
14. Sutcliffe A, Fickas S, Sohlberg MM, Ehlhardt LA. Investigating the usability of assistive user interfaces. Interacting with Computers 2003;15(4):577-602.
15. Sohlberg MM, Fickas S, Ehlhardt LA, Todis B. The longitudinal effects of accessible e-mail for individuals with severe cognitive impairments. Aphasiology 2005;19(7):651-681.
16. Ehlhardt LA, Sohlberg MM, Glang A, Albin R. TEACH-M: A pilot study evaluating an instructional sequence for persons with impaired memory and executive functions. Brain Inury 2005;19(8):569-583.
17. Egan JL, Worrall R, Oxenham D. An Internet training intervention for people with traumatic brain injury: Barriers and outcomes. Brain Injury 2005;19(8):555-568.
18. Hart T, Hawkey K, Whyte J. Use of a portable voice organizer to remember therapy goals in traumatic brain injury rehabilitation: A within-subjects trial. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2002;17:556-570.
19. Hart T, O'Neil-Pirozzi T, Morita C. Clinician expectations for portable electronic devices as cognitive-behavioural orthoses in traumatic brain injury rehabilitation. Brain Injury 2002;17:401-411.
20. Morton MV, Webman P. Psychosocial and emotional sequelae of individuals with traumatic brain injury: a literature review and recommendations. Brain Injury 1995;9(1):81-92.
21. Vaccaro MJ, Hart T, Whyte J. Internet resources for traumatic brain injury: a selective review of websites for consumers. NeuroRehabilitation 2002;17(2):169-174.
22. Hart T, Buchhofer R, Vaccaro M. Portable electronic devices as memory and organizational aids after traumatic brain injury: a consumer survey study. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2004;19(5):351-365.
23. Ricker J, Rosenthal M, Garay E, DeLuca J, Germain A, Abraham-Fuchs K, Schmidt K. Telerehabiliation needs: A survey of persons with acquired brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2002;17:242-250.
24. Willis B, Lessler J. Question Appraisal System QAS-99. www.appliedresearch.cancer.gov/areas/cognitive/QAS99, 1999.
25. Whiteneck GG, Charlifue SW, Gerhart KA, Overholser JD, Richardson GN. Quantifying handicap: a new measure of long-term rehabilitation outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992;73(6):519-526.
26. Pew Internet and American Life Project (November 2003). Retrieved January 17, 2006 from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/42/dataset-display.asp