Cognitive interventions post acquired brain injury
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- Metaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
- Consensus categories
- Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Not applicableConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: ReviewConsensus signal: Review
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.814
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 1.000
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
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
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Cognitive rehabilitation represents a substantial portion of rehabilitative efforts put forth in increasing independence following an acquired brain injury. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: This review examined four major areas of cognitive therapy including: attention/concentration, learning and memory, executive functioning, and general cognitive rehabilitation approaches. In total, 64 studies were evaluated throughout the four major areas, which provided the evidence-base for 18 conclusions. The majority of the conclusions were based on moderate and limited evidence, however three strong and one conflicting conclusions were made. CONCLUSIONS: Future research should explore functional outcome measures and long-term effects of treatment interventions through follow-up.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Brain Injury
- Topic
- Traumatic Brain Injury Research
- Field
- Medicine
- Canadian institutions
- Western University
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- Cognitive rehabilitation therapyAcquired brain injuryRehabilitationPsychological interventionCognitionCognitive remediation therapyPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationTraumatic brain injuryMedicineClinical psychologyPhysical therapyPsychiatry
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes