Impact of Motor, Cognitive, and Perceptual Disorders on Ability to Perform Activities of Daily Living After Stroke
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
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Using confirmatory factor analysis, this study evaluates the relative impact of motor, cognitive, and perceptual deficits on functional autonomy with 100 elderly (aged 55 to 79 years) victims of stroke. METHODS: Two different approaches were used for measuring functional autonomy: the Functional Autonomy Measurement System (Système de Mesure de l'Autonomie Fonctionnelle [SMAF]) and the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS). RESULTS: The results of the confirmatory factor analysis show that motor, cognitive, and perceptual factors all make a significant contribution to the variation in functional autonomy and confirm the accuracy of the model (93% of the variance is explained when the SMAF is used to measure functional autonomy, and 64% of the variance is explained when the AMPS is used). CONCLUSIONS: The factors that make the greatest contribution in explaining the variance in functional autonomy are, in order of importance, the motor factor, the perceptual factor, and the cognitive factor.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it