Prompt hospital discharge with home care improved physical health and community reintegration and reduced initial length of hospital stay after acute stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mayo NE, Wood-Dauphinee S, Côté R , et al. There's no place like home: an evaluation of early supported discharge for stroke. Stroke2000 May; 31 : 1016 –23 [OpenUrl][1][Abstract/FREE Full Text][2] QUESTION: Is a programme of prompt discharge from hospital and home based rehabilitation as effective as usual care (discharge planning and referral for follow up services) for patients with acute stroke? Randomised (allocation concealed), blinded (outcome assessors), controlled trial with follow up at 3 months. 5 acute care hospitals in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 114 patients (mean age 70 y, 68% men) who were admitted for acute stroke, had persistent motor deficits after stroke, and had caregivers who were able to provide live in care for 4 weeks after discharge from hospital. Exclusion criteria were need for assistance of >1 person to walk at 28 days after stroke, cognitive impairment, or co-existing conditions that affected ability to function independently (eg, dialysis or paraplegia). Follow up at 3 months was 84%. 58 patients were allocated to early discharge and home based rehabilitation, which comprised prompt discharge from hospital with immediate provision of follow up nursing care, physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, and dietary consultation services by a multidisciplinary team. Services were provided for 4 weeks. Rehabilitation care was individualised to patient needs and provided at home. All patients received ≥1 nurse home visit; subsequent home visits were arranged as needed and supplemented with telephone monitoring. 56 patients were allocated to … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DStroke%26rft.stitle%253DStroke%26rft.aulast%253DMayo%26rft.auinit1%253DN.%2BE.%26rft.volume%253D31%26rft.issue%253D5%26rft.spage%253D1016%26rft.epage%253D1023%26rft.atitle%253DThere%2527s%2BNo%2BPlace%2BLike%2BHome%2B%253A%2BAn%2BEvaluation%2Bof%2BEarly%2BSupported%2BDischarge%2Bfor%2BStroke%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1161%252F01.STR.31.5.1016%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F10797160%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/ijlink?linkType=ABST&journalCode=strokeaha&resid=31/5/1016&atom=%2Febnurs%2F3%2F4%2F126.atom
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".