The trajectory of minor stroke recovery for men and their female spousal caregivers: literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This paper is a report of a narrative review to examine the current state of knowledge regarding the impact of minor stroke on male patients and their female spousal caregivers' recovery trajectory and quality of life. BACKGROUND: Minor stroke survivors are often discharged early in the recovery process. The perception of the healthcare community that these patients and their female spousal caregivers will experience an uneventful recovery may lead to inadequate preparation for the postdischarge period. METHODS: A range of databases was searched to identify papers addressing 'minor stroke', 'transitions', 'quality of life', 'chronic disease', 'caregivers' and 'spouse caregivers', including AARP Ageline, AMED, CINAHL, Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, MEDLINE and PsychInfo. Papers published in English from 1990 to December 2006 were included. Thirty-four papers were in the final data set. RESULTS: Minor stroke survivors and their female spousal caregivers may experience major challenges in adaptations postdischarge. The trajectory of minor stroke recovery may necessitate a re-evaluation of life plans, rethinking of priorities and integration of resulting disabilities into current and emerging life situations for both stroke survivors and their female spousal caregivers. In many cases these adaptations are compounded by transitions associated with the normal ageing process. CONCLUSION: While there is extensive literature on stroke recovery and the role of caregivers in general, there is little available describing the recovery of minor stroke survivors in relation to the normal ageing process. Further research is needed examining recovery from a transitional perspective, to support nurses and other health professionals discharge planning.
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 | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".