Predictors of handicap situations following post-stroke rehabilitation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Many stroke survivors have to cope with impairments and disabilities that may result in the occurrence of handicap situations. The purpose of the study was to explore bio-psycho-social predictors of handicap situations six months after discharge from an intensive rehabilitation programme. METHODS: At discharge from a rehabilitation programme, participants were evaluated with instruments measuring motor, sensory, cognitive, perceptual, affective and psychosocial impairments and disabilities that may play a role in the development of handicap. Some other demographic and clinical variables, and those related to rehabilitation, were also collected. Six months later, they were re-assessed in their own environment in order to document their handicap level with the Assessment of Life Habits (LIFE-H). RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-two stroke patients participated in the discharge evaluation and 102 of them also participated in the handicap measurement. Relationships between handicap level and impairments and disabilities were all statistically significant. Multiple regression analyses indicated that affect, lower extremity co-ordination, length of stay in rehabilitation, balance, age and comorbidity at the end of an intensive rehabilitation programme are the best predictors of handicap situations six months later (adjusted R(2): 68.1%). CONCLUSIONS: In spite of its exploratory nature, this study revealed that, among a substantial number of personal characteristics, some were more related to a handicap measure and have greater predictive value. Other studies should be carried out to validate these findings and to consider more environmental factors in order to better understand factors related to the development of handicap situations.
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.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it