Motor Recovery, Functional Status, and Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Complete Spinal Cord Injuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Study Design. A retrospective cohort with cross- sectional follow-up. Objectives. The primary objective was to determine motor recovery in patients with complete traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI). Secondary objectives included: 1) determining which factors predict local recovery, 2) assessing functional status using the Functional Independence Measure (FIM), and 3) assessing generic health-related quality of life using the Short Form-36 (SF-36). Summary of Background Data. Motor recovery following complete SCI has been documented in the literature; however, it has been difficult to interpret: 1) spinal shock is often not addressed; 2) the definition of complete SCI has changed over the last 10 years; and 3) few studies differentiate between local neurologic recovery in the zone of partial preservation and neurologic recovery caudal to the lesion. Methods. All patients admitted to Vancouver Hospital with a complete SCI between 1994 and 2001 were identified and included in the study if they remained complete following the resolution of spinal shock. Minimum 2-year follow-up consisted of an ASIA motor score, an FIM, and the SF-36. Results. Of 133 patients identified, 94 were eligible and 70 completed follow-up. For the tetraplegic patients, the average ASIA motor score was 11.9 ± 10.7 on admission and 20.1 ± 10.8 at follow-up, a change reflecting local recovery only. For the paraplegic patients, the average ASIA motor score was 49.3 ± 2.4 on admission and 50.6 ± 1.7 at follow-up. Conclusions. Motor recovery does not occur below the zone of injury for patients with complete SCI. Varying degrees of local recovery can be expected in tetraplegic individuals. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate motor recovery in patients with complete spinal cord injury. Seventy patients (30 with tetraplegia and 40 with paraplegia) admitted to Vancouver Hospital were followed-up at a minimum of 2 years postinjury. Recovery in complete spinal cord injury below the zone of partial preservation was not apparent.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".