Symptom burden and functional gains in a cancer rehabilitation unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: To determine if there is a relationship between patient symptoms and functional improvement on inpatient rehabilitation. METHODS: Retrospective review of medical records at an American tertiary referral-based cancer center of all patients admitted to an inpatient rehabilitation unit between 3/1/2013-5/20/2013. Main outcome measures included the Edmonton Symptom and Assessment Scale (ESAS) and Functional Independence Measure (FIM). FINDINGS: The medical records for 71 unique cancer rehabilitation inpatients were analyzed. Statistical analysis of total admission ESAS on total FIM change found no significant relationships. The symptom burden of the patients was mild. Patients demonstrated statistically significant improvements in function and symptoms during inpatient rehabilitation. The mean change in total FIM and total ESAS were an increase of 19.20 and decrease of 7.41 respectively. Statistically significant changes occurred in fatigue, sleep, pain, and anxiety. CONCLUSION: Both symptom and functional scores improved significantly during inpatient rehabilitation. However, no significant relationships were found between symptoms at admission and improvement in FIM.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".