MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038476115 · doi:10.3109/02699052.2013.862738

Functional independence measure at rehabilitation admission as a predictor of return to driving after traumatic brain injury

2014· article· en· W2038476115 on OpenAlexaff
Nora Cullen, Aneta Krakowski, Christina Taggart

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Injury · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFunctional Independence MeasureTraumatic brain injuryRehabilitationGlasgow Coma ScalePhysical therapyLogistic regressionMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPoison controlInjury preventionRating scalePsychologyEmergency medicineInternal medicinePsychiatryDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine the utility of three common measures as predictors of return to driving after traumatic brain injury (TBI): Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) within the first 24 hours of injury and both Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and Disability Rating Scale (DRS) at rehabilitation admission. METHODS: Seventy-two participants with TBI completed a questionnaire that assessed return to driving post-TBI, as measured by reinstatement of the driver's license. Participants who did not return to driving for non-medical reasons or who had not driven pre-injury and did not obtain a driver's license post-injury were excluded from analysis. This produced a final sample of 59 participants. Scores on GCS, FIM and DRS, leveraged from an existing database, were compared between participants who had and those who had not returned to driving post-injury. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the relationship of each predictor variable to return to driving. RESULTS: Only the FIM score at rehabilitation admission was significantly associated with return to driving (p < 0.01). FIM score had a sensitivity of 72% and specificity of 73% with respect to return to driving. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the use of FIM at rehabilitation admission as a predictor of return to driving. Future studies should be directed at identifying other measures to be used in combination with FIM to accurately predict return to driving post-TBI.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.327 · 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.

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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain InjurySame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207