Functional Improvement After Pediatric Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the functional gain (FGain) with pediatric spinal cord injury inpatient rehabilitation and to identify the relationship of various factors to FGain in pediatric spinal cord injury inpatient rehabilitation. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review of a series of 91 children with spinal cord injury admitted from 1993 to 1998 in a freestanding rehabilitation hospital. Admission and discharge functional status were assessed with the Pediatric Functional Independence Measure (WeeFIM) instrument for children 7 yr. The outcome measure is the FGain (difference between the discharge and admission functional status). RESULTS: Significant gains in functional status were observed in all patients. FGain was not significantly related to age, sex, length of inpatient rehabilitation, pathogenesis, or completeness or neurologic level of injury. However, there was a trend for higher FGain for patients with incomplete spinal cord injury and traumatic spinal cord injury. CONCLUSIONS: Functional improvement occurs with pediatric spinal cord injury inpatient rehabilitation. There is a trend for higher FGain in patients with less severe injury and traumatic injury. The lack of relationship between FGain and length of inpatient rehabilitation suggests that a variety of other factors influence the relationship between FGain and length of inpatient rehabilitation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".