Review: therapy based rehabilitation services reduce the risk of deterioration in patients who have had a stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Legg L, Langhorne P; Outpatient Service Trialists. Rehabilitation therapy services for stroke patients living at home: systematic review of randomised trials. Lancet 2004;363:352–6.[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] Q In community dwelling patients who have had a stroke, do therapy based rehabilitation services offered ⩽1 year after stroke onset or discharge from hospital reduce deterioration in ability to perform activities of daily living (ADL)? Outpatient Service Trialists. Therapy-based rehabilitation services for stroke patients at home. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;(1):CD002925. ### ![Graphic][5] Data sources: Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, CINAHL, PsycLIT, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, AMED, Social Science Citation Index, Science Citation Index, bibliographies of relevant articles, and researchers in the field. Trial searching was completed in November 2001. ### ![Graphic][6] Study selection and assessment: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared outpatient therapy based rehabilitation services (ie, interventions provided by qualified physiotherapists, occupational therapists, … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DLancet%26rft.stitle%253DLancet%26rft.aulast%253DLegg%26rft.auinit1%253DL.%26rft.volume%253D363%26rft.issue%253D9406%26rft.spage%253D352%26rft.epage%253D356%26rft.atitle%253DRehabilitation%2Btherapy%2Bservices%2Bfor%2Bstroke%2Bpatients%2Bliving%2Bat%2Bhome%253A%2Bsystematic%2Breview%2Bof%2Brandomised%2Btrials.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1016%252FS0140-6736%252804%252915434-2%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F15070563%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15434-2&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=15070563&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febnurs%2F7%2F4%2F117.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000188590900008&link_type=ISI [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif
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 | 0.003 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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".