Prediction of long-term occupational performance outcomes for adults after moderate to severe traumatic brain injury
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine predictors of long-term occupational performance outcomes for adults after moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHOD: This study involved analysis of data from a retrospective cohort of adults (N = 306) with moderate to severe TBI discharged from a Pennsylvania rehabilitation treatment facility. Extensive pre-injury sociodemographic, injury-severity, post-injury personal (cognitive, physical, affective), post-injury environmental (social, institutional, physical), and post-injury occupational performance (participation in self-care, productivity, leisure activities) data were gathered from hospital records and using in-person interviews. Interviews occurred at a mean time of 14 (range, 7-24) years post-injury. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis was used to investigate determinants of long-term occupational performance outcomes. RESULTS: Pre-injury behavioural problems, male gender, post-injury cognitive and physical deficits, and lack of access to transportation were significant independent predictors of worse occupational performance outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The study supports the use of a comprehensive model for long-term outcomes after TBI where pre-injury characteristics and post-injury cognitive and physical characteristics account for the greatest proportion of explained variance.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it