MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035003697 · doi:10.3109/02699052.2011.613089

Participation outcomes for children with acquired brain injury: A narrative review

2011· review· en· W2035003697 on OpenAlex
Erik van Tol, Jan Willem Gorter, Carol DeMatteo, Anke Meester‐Delver

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Injury · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLAcquired brain injuryMEDLINEPsychologyClinical psychologyQuality of life (healthcare)Narrative reviewMedicineDevelopmental psychologyPhysical therapyRehabilitationPsychological interventionPsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To review the literature on participation outcomes used in children and adolescents with acquired brain injury (ABI) and to synthesize the available evidence on recovery trajectories in participation after ABI. METHOD: This study searched electronic databases (Medline, Cinahl, Embase and PsychInfo) from March 2011 back to the earliest available time (1966) using the following terms with brain injury (brain tumours excluded) and children: social or community or school and outcome assessment or participation. Retrieved articles were rated for methodological quality using Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine criteria (CEBM). RESULTS: Sixteen articles were included for analysis. The methodological characteristics and quality of these studies varied considerably. Three studies used an explicit participation measure, nine studies featured an implicit participation measure and four used tailored participation measures. There is level 1c evidence that children and adolescents with ABI have participation restrictions at home, at school and in the community 18 months (SD = 14) after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: The available literature indicates that children and adolescents with ABI are at risk for participation restrictions. Research on recovery trajectories in participation after ABI in children is lacking. Longitudinal studies using explicit participation measures and higher quality research methodologies (quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods) are recommended.

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.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.290 · 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