Goal-directed outpatient rehabilitation following TBI: A pilot study of programme effectiveness and comparison of outcomes in home and day hospital settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To determine (i) the effectiveness of a goal-directed, environment-focused occupational therapy intervention and (ii) to compare rehabilitation gains across a day hospital (outpatient) setting and home setting. RESEARCH DESIGN: Repeated measures cross-over design with pre-post test measures and a baseline control period, random allocation to a treatment setting sequence and an independent outcome assessor who was blinded to treatment sequence. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Descriptive and non-parametric comparative analyses employed. Fourteen participants with severe traumatic brain injury completed a 12 week outpatient occupational therapy programme. The programme was directed by the participant's chosen goals, which were established using a client-centred, structured, goal-planning process. Outcome measures included Goal attainment scaling, the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, the Sydney Psychosocial Reintegration Scale, the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Index, the Craig Hospital Inventory of Environmental Factors and self-rated satisfaction with therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: The therapy programme resulted in significant improvements in goal attainment, occupational performance, psychosocial reintegration and ability and adjustment levels, compared with baseline. Differences in gains made in home vs day hospital settings were not statistically significant, with the exception of higher levels of patient satisfaction with therapy at home. CONCLUSIONS: To assist further with decision-making about where to conduct therapy, further research is needed to compare the outcomes and determine the cost effectiveness of therapy at home and in day hospital settings.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".