Review: poor-quality trials suggest that some interventions for family caregivers of patients with stroke improve carer outcomesCommentary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
C Carroll Dr C Carroll, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK; c.carroll@shef.ac.uk Can interventions improve outcomes for family caregivers of patients with stroke? Studies selected evaluated interventions intended primarily for family carers (⩾18 y of age) of patients with stroke. Exclusion criteria were interventions of education or information-giving only and studies assessing cost-effectiveness only. Outcomes included caregiver wellbeing and coping skills. Medline, PreMedline, and EMBASE/Excerpta Medica to 2006; AMED, ASSIA, BNI, C2-SPECTR, Cochrane Library , CINAHL, IBSS, PsycINFO, Social Science Citation Index, and Science Citation Index to 2005; grey and unpublished literature to 2005; and reference lists were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). …
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".