For someone living with traumatic brain injury (TBI), everyday tasks such as remembering appointments or managing messages can take extra effort. An AI assistant may help organize these tasks or prepare reminders. But using it can also mean sharing personal information with a technology company. In an October 2026 article, writer Shireen Jeejeebhoy, drawing on her own experience of brain injury, asks an important question: can people understand what happens to their information when they use AI?
AI tools can support independence, but they should be easy to understand and use. A person may have trouble with memory, attention, or processing speed, so complicated privacy settings can be hard to manage. Therapists can help by explaining what information a tool uses, where it may go, and how to turn the feature off. People should be free to refuse a tool without losing access to support.
Privacy matters for other people, too. For example, recording a conversation with a therapist and uploading it for AI analysis may share the therapist’s image or voice without their permission. Some AI tools work on a device; others send information over the internet to remote servers. Turning off the internet may offer a simple clue about whether a feature works offline, but it does not fully explain how a company handles information. Users should check the service’s privacy details and ask for help if anything is unclear.
AI is also being studied as a way to help assess recovery after TBI. In research described in an October 2026 SelectScience interview, investigators are combining blood tests with simple tablet tasks that measure speed and accuracy. The aim is to see whether these results can help estimate who may continue to have symptoms. This is research in progress, not a routine test that can diagnose or predict recovery with certainty.
This research addresses a real challenge: a brain scan may look normal even when someone continues to have symptoms. Looking at several kinds of information together might help clinicians decide who needs closer follow-up. But a risk estimate is only useful if it leads to appropriate care. Researchers must show how accurate it is, who it works for, and whether it actually improves decisions.
Therapists and other clinicians can help people try AI safely. Start with a simple task that does not involve private health information, such as organizing a general schedule. Explain how the tool works in clear language, give the person time to ask questions, and check that they know how to review or correct its output. AI should support clinical conversations, not make decisions on its own.
There are important limits to consider. AI can make mistakes, and a confident-looking answer is not always correct. A tool may also work better for some people than others. Clinicians and researchers need to check the evidence, explain uncertainty, and remain responsible for decisions that affect care.
People with brain injury should be included in decisions about how these tools are designed and used. They should be able to understand the benefits and risks, choose whether to use a tool, and change their minds. Clear explanations, strong privacy protections, and careful testing are essential.
AI may help with everyday tasks and may one day support better follow-up after TBI. Its value will depend on more than what the technology can do: it must be safe, understandable, and useful in real life. Future research should ask people with brain injury and their therapists whether these tools truly make daily life and care better.
References
Jeejeebhoy, S. (2026, October 22). AI and people with brain injury. Psychology Today.
Nicholas, S. (2026, October 5). Can biomarkers and AI transform traumatic brain injury care? SelectScience.