Recovery Time of Independent Poststroke Abilities: Part I
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purposes of this study were to determine the time of the recovery of poststroke abilities and to identify prognostic indicators associated with recovery time among stroke patients undergoing a rehabilitation program. A sample of 421 stroke participants admitted to a rehabilitation center was recruited from medical records that were available from January 1987 to December 1992. The mean age was 61.8 years (range, 17-89 years). The relationship between the achievement of independent poststroke abilities and the potential covariates associated with recovery time was assessed through the analysis of survival data. Cox maximum-likelihood proportional hazard models were used for the analysis. Independent poststroke abilities included behavior, cognitive, perceptual, communication, visual, and motor status. The time from rehabilitation admission to complete independence was introduced to the model in relation to the covariates. The mean time of recovery of poststroke abilities ranged from 18.70 to 32.40 days from the rehabilitation admission. The survival analysis revealed that the time of recovery of the selected poststroke abilities was significantly influenced (p <.05) by one or several factors, among these were neuropsychological, physical, and life habits. With this precious information, stroke rehabilitation specialists may be able to reduce the length of time required to recover independent poststroke abilities by treating the specific neuropsychological, physical, and life habit characteristics identified in this study. A faster poststroke recovery will reduce the socioeconomic impact generated by stroke disability and will ensure a better quality of life to the stroke survivor.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".