MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035906378 · doi:10.1310/tsr1403-1

The Assessment of Poststroke Depression

2007· review· en· W2035906378 on OpenAlex
Katherine Salter, Sanjit K. Bhogal, Norine Foley, Jeffrey W. Jutai, Robert Teasell

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

VenueTopics in Stroke Rehabilitation · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversitySt Joseph's Health CareParkwood Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStroke (engine)Depression (economics)Context (archaeology)Quality of life (healthcare)MedicinePsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPost-stroke depressionCognitionActivities of daily livingIntensive care medicinePhysical therapyPsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poststroke depression (PSD) is a common clinical consequence of stroke. PSD is associated with poor functional and social outcomes, reduced quality of life, the presence of cognitive impairment, and increased mortality. Despite the potential benefit associated with the identification and treatment of PSD, it often remains unrecognized and undertreated. The present study provides a critical review and synthesis of measurement properties for 10 instruments used in the assessment of depression following stroke. Assessment considerations specific to PSD are addressed, and tools are reviewed within the context of stroke. To facilitate the timely detection, diagnosis, and initiation of treatment for PSD, a two-step assessment process is recommended, thereby taking strategic advantage of the strengths and limitations associated with self-report and observer-rating assessment tools.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.382 · 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