Skip to main content

Do we need to know about cyberscams in neurorehabilitation? A cross-sectional scoping survey of Australasian clinicians and service providers

Kate Rachel Gould ; Matthew Carolan ; Jennie Louise Ponsford (2022) — Brain Impairment

View Original Source (opens in a new tab)

DOI: 10.1017/brimp.2022.13 (opens in a new tab)

Type:   Journal Article
Country:   Australia
Tags:   Acquired Brain Injury, Clinician Survey, Cyberscams, Intervention, Neurorehabilitation, Online Safety, Romance Scams, Vulnerability
What do these research terms mean?
Preprint
A manuscript shared before formal peer review and publication. Check whether a later published version is available.
Dataset
A collection of data or examples for others to inspect or reuse. It can appear in Library search and topic mapping, but RSRC does not use dataset records as evidence in Research Insights.
Dissertation or thesis
Research submitted for an academic degree. This describes its format, not its reliability.
Journal article
An article published in a journal. This label alone does not establish peer review, study quality, or how well the findings apply elsewhere.
Qualitative research
Examines experiences, meanings, or processes, often through interviews or observations. It can explain how something happens without estimating how common it is.
Quantitative research
Uses numerical measurements to describe patterns or test relationships. A relationship between two measurements does not by itself show that one causes the other.
Systematic review
Uses a planned, documented method to find and assess research addressing a question. Its conclusions still depend on the included studies and what the search covered.
Meta-analysis
Statistically combines results from multiple studies. Combining studies does not remove weaknesses in their design or make unlike populations interchangeable.
Not classified
This record has no recognized label in this filter. It does not mean the publication used no method, or that no research exists.

Definitions draw on DataCite resource types; Cochrane review methods; NLM: association and causation. RSRC’s dataset and classification rules are explained in our methodology.

Citation tools
Download RIS Download BibTeX 


              
              

            

          

        


      

      

    

        
Transparency

        
Evidence and review status

        
This page contains AI-generated content. No human content review or subject-matter-expert review is recorded.

    


    

                    

                
Source basis

                

                    Downloaded PDF
                

            

                    

                
Source updates

                

                    No notice found at last check
                

            

                    

                
AI-generated page content

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Automated checks

                

                    Passed
                

            

                    

                
Administrative approval

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Human content review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

                    

                
Subject-matter-expert review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

            


    

        
            How this was prepared
        
        

                            

                    
Source basis

                    

                    
RSRC downloaded and privately stored a copy of the paper for internal analysis. The PDF is not offered to viewers from this page.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    PDF added to RSRC:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Source updates

                    

                    
No incoming update notice was found in the dated Crossref response. Coverage is incomplete, particularly for corrections and expressions of concern; this is not a guarantee that the source is valid or unchanged.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Last source-status attempt:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
AI-generated page content

                    

                    
AI-generated research notes displayed on this page: Synopsis, Identified gaps, Methods, Limitations, Future work. The paper itself is not described as AI-generated.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Document analysis recorded:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                            
  • 
                                    Page record updated:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Automated checks

                    

                    
The current, source-bound synopsis passed the recorded versioned publication checks.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Checks completed:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                            

                            
                                View passed checks (3)
                            
                            
    
                                                                    
  • Length, completeness, repetition, refusal, boilerplate, and active-markup screening
    • 
                                                                    
  • Numerical claims checked against the available source text
    • 
                                                                    
  • English-source lexical grounding check
    • 
                                                            

                        

                                        

                

                            

                    
Administrative approval

                    

                    
The record is approved for public display, but a complete historical administrator action is not recorded.


                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Human content review

                    

                    
No human review is recorded for the AI-generated content displayed on this page.


                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Subject-matter-expert review

                    

                    
RSRC has not recorded review of this content by a subject-matter or methods expert.


                    
                                        

                

                    

    


    

        Review-state definitions

        Found a possible error?
        Request a correction.
    



    



              

        
                  

            
Synopsis

            
Cybercrime affecting people with acquired brain injury (ABI) is examined through the lens of neurorehabilitation in this cross-sectional scoping survey. The study aims to determine whether clinicians working with adults who have ABI encounter cyberscams, identify contributing risk factors and impacts, and evaluate views on prevention and treatment approaches. Conducted across Australia and New Zealand, the online survey gathered responses from 101 clinicians and service providers working in multidisciplinary contexts, with ethics approval and digital consent obtained. Findings indicate that just over half of the respondents reported one or more clients affected by cyberscams, with romance scams being most common. Participants noted that cognitive impairments and loneliness were associated with increased vulnerability to such scams. Cyberscams also influenced how treatment was delivered and posed emotional challenges for clinicians themselves. Across the surveyed group, no intervention emerged as highly effective in addressing the combined financial and psychological harms of cyberscam victimization. The researchers conclude that cyberscams constitute a clinical issue pertinent to neurorehabilitation providers, and call for prevalence studies to gauge scope and impact. They emphasize the current gap in effective interventions and underscore the need to develop evidence-based prevention and treatment strategies to help people with ABI participate in online life more safely. This study highlights an area in need of systematic investigation and practical guidance for clinicians supporting individuals at risk of cyberscams.

          

        
                  

            
Identified Gaps

            
The paper identifies no available clinical guidance for cyberscam recovery after ABI, no known interventions addressing combined financial and psychological trauma, and no highly effective strategies identified by clinicians. It remains unclear whether clinicians recognise scams and use effective prevention/treatment approaches. Evidence is needed on scam frequency, whether ABI clients have a distinct scam profile, mechanisms of romance-scam vulnerability, and effectiveness of tailored resources and interventions.

          

        
                  

            
Methods

            
Exploratory cross-sectional scoping survey of a convenience sample of 101 clinicians and community ABI workers in Australia and New Zealand (May–August 2019). A researcher-developed, piloted online Qualtrics survey gathered clinician demographics, self-rated cyberscam capacity, and reports on affected ABI clients, perceived vulnerabilities, impacts, and prevention/treatment effectiveness. Analyses were primarily descriptive; t-tests compared prevention and treatment ratings between clinicians with versus without cyberscam-case experience.

          

        
                  

            
Limitations

            
Clinician/service-provider reports limited direct inference about ABI clients’ experiences and produced secondary, subjective cognitive-impairment ratings. The convenience/snowball sample had possible recruitment bias, including high Victoria and Tasmania responses; the response rate was unknown and prevalence could not be estimated. Other limitations were modest sample size, 50% incomplete surveys, no construct or criterion validity analyses, and possible overlap in cases reported by different clinicians.

          

        
                  

            
Future Work

            
Conduct prevalence studies using first-person, representative data and validated self-report/objective measures of cyberscam vulnerability. Verify proposed mechanisms of romance-scam vulnerability in ABI, including loneliness, relationship desire, attention and cognitive fatigue. Develop and evaluate tailored prevention, treatment and psychological-recovery interventions, including adapted digital-citizenship resources. Qualitative research should investigate why clinicians rated available approaches poorly and examine experiences of people with ABI and close others.

          

              

    
    

        
Related Research Insights

        

            See how this publication connects to RSRC's living evidence syntheses through current citations and research-topic mapping.