MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153590988 · doi:10.2522/ptj.20090349

The Role of Caregiver Involvement in Upper-Limb Treatment in Individuals With Subacute Stroke

2010· article· en· W2153590988 on OpenAlexafffund
Jocelyn E. Harris, Janice J. Eng, William C. Miller, Andrew S. Dawson

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsMiller Group (Canada)Fraser HealthGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreToronto Rehabilitation Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsUpper limbRehabilitationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationStroke (engine)Physical therapyRandomized controlled trialMedicineAnalysis of varianceActivities of daily livingMotor functionRepeated measures designPsychologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Initial severity of upper-limb motor impairment and exercise intensity are important predictors of improved upper-limb function during stroke rehabilitation. Initial severity of motor impairment, however, is not modifiable by rehabilitation, and increased one-on-one treatment is not always feasible. Alternative methods to increase intensity and improve upper-limb function are needed. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine caregiver involvement in upper-limb treatment as a method to improve upper-limb function. DESIGN: This study was a secondary analysis of a multi-site randomized controlled trial for upper-limb recovery during subacute inpatient stroke rehabilitation. METHODS: Data from 50 individuals with subacute stroke who were randomly assigned to the experimental group (upper-limb exercise) were used for the analysis. Outcome variables were measured at baseline and at completion of the 4-week intervention. Group comparisons between participants with caregiver support and participants without caregiver support were done using an analysis of variance. Using the Fugl-Meyer Upper-Limb Motor Impairment Scale and time spent in treatment (intensity) as covariates, a multivariate regression analysis was performed to determine the additive value of caregiver support on upper-limb function, as measured by change scores on the Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory and the Motor Activity Log. RESULTS: Group comparisons revealed that participants with caregiver support had improved upper-limb function compared with those without caregiver support and were more likely to increase the amount of time spent doing exercise. The multiple regression analysis showed that Fugl-Meyer score, treatment intensity, and caregiver support were significant predictors of upper-limb improvement (R(2)=.240-.292). In the regression models, caregiver support accounted for 5% to 9% of upper-limb improvement. LIMITATIONS: Support was coded as a dichotomous variable, and thus the degree of support or qualitative nature of support was not captured. CONCLUSIONS: Involvement of caregivers was a determinant of improved upper-limb function over and above initial severity of motor impairment and exercise intensity. Further research is needed to determine the optimal qualitative and quantitative elements of caregiver involvement in stroke rehabilitation in order to maximize results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations79
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical TherapySame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207