Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation Evidence: Method of the SCIRE Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.086 | 0.195 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.048 | 0.035 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.003 |
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".