Arm and leg impairments and disabilities after stroke rehabilitation: relation to handicap
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: (1) To examine the relationships between measures of impairment and disability for the arm and leg with a measure of handicap and (2) to identify the impairment or disability most strongly related to handicap situations. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Intensive functional rehabilitation unit and community. PATIENTS: One hundred and two persons who had a stroke. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Arm and leg impairments and disabilities were evaluated with reliable and valid tests at discharge from rehabilitation. Six months later, handicap situations were evaluated with the Assessments of Life Habits (LIFE-H). RESULTS: Arm and leg impairments and disabilities are correlated with handicap situations. Disability of the leg is more strongly associated with handicap than arm disability. Arm and leg disabilities are not statistically more strongly related to handicap than arm and leg impairments. CONCLUSIONS: The high correlations found between handicap situations and the impairment and disability measures of the leg provide new information that support the importance of mobility to promote integration after stroke.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".