Differential profiles for patients with traumatic and non-traumatic brain injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To profile the demographic, clinical and environmental characteristics of persons with acquired brain injury receiving inpatient rehabilitation services in Canada. DESIGN: This study utilizes data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information's National Rehabilitation Reporting System, between April 2001 and March 2006. The data were collected from publicly insured institutions providing inpatient rehabilitation across Canada. The main outcome measures examined were demographic and clinical characteristics. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with brain injury by traumatic (n=2675) vs non-traumatic causes (n=2759). RESULTS: Approximately half of acquired brain injury patients receiving inpatient rehabilitation had non-traumatic causes of brain injury. Traumatic brain injury patients were more likely to be younger, male, from rural areas, and to make greater gains in rehabilitation. Differences were found in the types and numbers of comorbidities. However, patients from these 2 groups had similar lengths of rehabilitation stay. CONCLUSION: These findings support a differential profile of patients by brain injury aetiology. This has relevance for staff training, resource allocation and future research.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".