I’m a medically retired Army veteran working on a project called THRIVE-VET.
It’s a structured recovery + vocational rehabilitation framework designed to help trauma-affected veterans regain functional stability and employment readiness using:
VA-style measurable metrics (PHQ-9, GAD-7, etc.)
assistive LLM tools (structured journaling, decision support, documentation)
state-legal medical cannabis tracking (observational only, not clinical advice)
hands-on training planning (not classroom-first)
a replicable program structure that could work in civilian settings too
The project includes print-ready VA/VRE packet templates, a research proposal draft, and recovery verification summaries based on VA Blue Button documentation.
I’m posting here to get feedback on:
whether the structure is technically credible,
how to make it more reproducible,
what would be needed for a legitimate research pathway (IRB/PI sponsorship),
and whether anyone has experience with similar “patient-led + structured evidence” approaches.
I’m not selling anything. I’m trying to turn a personal recovery system into something measurable and replicable.
Feedback (especially critical feedback) is welcome.
james_r_h•1h ago
This project is structured as a VA-aligned, evidence-tracking framework built around existing measurable outcomes (PHQ-9, GAD-7, PC-PTSD-5, sleep/stability metrics, treatment adherence). The THC component is observational only (state-legal use + self-reported tracking), and the LLM component is treated as an assistive documentation and cognitive-support tool, not a decision-making authority.
The goal is to make recovery and vocational rehabilitation more reproducible and measurable, and potentially create a path toward a legitimate IRB-supported study (PI sponsorship, proper consent, controls, etc.).
I’m posting here specifically because I expect pushback and want technical critique: study design flaws, ethics concerns, data integrity issues, and what would be required to make something like this publishable/replicable.