MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009527610 · doi:10.1310/tsr1906-536

Effectiveness of Psychological Interventions in Chronic Stage of Stroke: A Systematic Review

2012· review· en· W2009527610 on OpenAlexafffund
Swati Mehta, Shelialah Pereira, Shannon Janzen, Amanda McIntyre, J. Andrew McClure, Robert Teasell

Bibliographic record

VenueTopics in Stroke Rehabilitation · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsParkwood InstituteWestern UniversitySt Joseph's Health CareLawson Health Research Institute
FundersCanadian Stroke Network
KeywordsPsychological interventionCINAHLMoodMedicineRandomized controlled trialStroke (engine)Physical therapyMEDLINECoping (psychology)Clinical psychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of interventions for psychological issues faced by individuals post stroke when initiated in the chronic stage of stroke. METHOD: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Scopus databases were searched from 1980 to July 2012. A study was included if (1) the study was a randomized controlled trial (RCT); (2) at least 50% of individuals in the study were entered into the study at over 6 months post stroke; (3) the study examined the effect of an intervention on psychological functioning; and (4) study participants were ≥ 18 years of age. Similar interventions were grouped and results summarized. Data on the study design, participant characteristics, interventions, outcomes, and adverse events were extracted from each of the selected studies. RESULTS: Nine RCTs met inclusion criteria. All 9 studies examined effectiveness on mood and 3 on adjustment. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation had the strongest evidence of effectiveness in improving mood followed by pharmacotherapy; whereas exercise appeared to be effective in improving adjustment and coping among individuals in the chronic stage of stroke. CONCLUSION: Overall, interventions provided in the chronic stage of stroke appear to be effective in improving mood and adjustment up to 3 months post intervention. The use of multidisciplinary interventions and acceptance models may be important in the overall adjustment process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.359 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTopics in Stroke RehabilitationSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207