MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040748085 · doi:10.1310/sci1301-1

Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation Evidence: Method of the SCIRE Systematic Review

2007· article· en· W2040748085 on OpenAlexafffund
Janice J. Eng, Robert Teasell, William C. Miller, Dalton L. Wolfe, Andrea Townson, Jo-Anne Aubut, Caroline Abramson, Jane Hsieh, Sandra Connolly, Kristin J. Konnyu

Bibliographic record

VenueTopics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreParkwood InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesLawson Health Research Institute
FundersU.S. Public Health ServiceMichael Smith Health Research BCCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchRick Hansen Foundation
KeywordsMedicineRehabilitationSystematic reviewSpinal cord injuryEvidence-based medicinePhysical therapyPsychological interventionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRandomized controlled trialEvidence-based practiceSpasticityBest evidenceQuality of evidenceMEDLINEProtocol (science)Alternative medicineNursingFamily medicineSpinal cordSurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation Evidence (SCIRE) is a synthesis of the research evidence underlying rehabilitation interventions to improve the health of people living with SCI. SCIRE covers a comprehensive set of topics and in this issue we present six papers relevant to SCI rehabilitation clinicians (SCI inpatient rehabilitation practices, gait strategies, upper extremity reconstructive surgery, spasticity treatments, cardiovascular health and bone health). The SCIRE used a systematic and well-defined protocol to assess and synthesize the evidence. Each article was scored for its methodological quality using either the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) Score for randomized controlled trials or the Downs and Black Tool for other types of studies. Following the individual study assessment, conclusions were drawn about the accumulated studies for each topic of interest based on the levels of evidence, quality of studies and concurring evidence. The SCIRE project was designed for health professionals to inform them of best practices.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.424
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations161
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTopics in Spinal Cord Injury RehabilitationSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207