Cognitive-Behavioral Prevention of Postconcussion Syndrome in At-Risk Patients
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the tolerability and estimate the treatment effect of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) delivered soon after mild traumatic brain injury to patients at risk for chronic postconcussion syndrome (PCS). SETTING: Tertiary rehabilitation center. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-eight patients with uncomplicated mild traumatic brain injury, determined to be at risk for chronic PCS based on a published algorithm that incorporates subacute postconcussion symptoms and maladaptive illness beliefs (recovery expectations and perceived consequences). They were enrolled within 6 weeks postinjury. DESIGN: Open-label, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial, with masked outcome assessment 3 months after enrolment. Interventions were (1) treatment as usual (education, reassurance, and symptom management strategies) from an occupational therapist, or (2) treatment as usual plus CBT delivered by a psychologist. MAIN MEASURES: Rivermead Postconcussion Symptoms Questionnaire. RESULTS: Four participants (2:2) withdrew. Treatment credibility and satisfaction ratings were high in the CBT group. Treatment effect sizes were moderate for postconcussion symptoms (Cohen d = 0.74) and moderate-large for most secondary outcome measures (Cohen d = 0.62-1.61). Fewer participants receiving CBT had a diagnosis of PCS at follow-up (54% vs 91%, P < .05). CONCLUSION: Our preliminary data suggest that CBT delivered soon after mild traumatic brain injury is well tolerated and may facilitate recovery in patients who are at risk for chronic PCS. A definitive clinical trial is warranted.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it