MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031903463 · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.108.531590

Ambulatory Activity of Stroke Survivors

2009· article· en· W2031903463 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia J. Manns, Evan R. L. Baldwin

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAmbulatoryStroke (engine)Activity monitorPhysical therapyPhysical activityEmergency medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Walking activity is an important part of exercise prescription for stroke survivors. The purpose of this study was to: (1) compare ambulatory activity parameters in subacute stroke survivors over three time periods; and (2) discuss options for measurement of ambulatory activity data with respect to absolute activity, intensity of activity, and variability and pattern of activity. METHODS: Ten subacute stroke survivors participated (mean+/-SD; age: 66+/-15 years; time from stroke to discharge: 75+/-31 days). Data collection was completed across three time periods, predischarge, 2 weeks postdischarge, and 6 weeks postdischarge. The Step Activity Monitor (Cyma Corporation) was used to measure daily activity parameters. Parameters representing dose, intensity, and variability/pattern of activity were determined using MatLab. RESULTS: Minutes of activity and length of activity bouts significantly increased from predischarge to 6 weeks postdischarge (P=0.030). CONCLUSIONS: The measurement of a variety of ambulatory activity parameters may aid clinicians and stroke survivors to determine whether exercise recommendations are being met with daily activity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.597
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations66
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207