Effectiveness of Rehabilitation in Enhancing Community Integration After Acute Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We assessed evidence for post-acute traumatic brain injury (TBI) rehabilitation interventions used to enhance community integration (CI) relevant to occupational therapy. METHOD: We conducted a systematic review of intervention studies on TBI rehabilitation from 1990 to 2007. RESULTS: We analyzed and summarized 10 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Of 10 studies, 7 found that post-acute TBI rehabilitation benefits CI; all effective studies involved occupational therapy or involved interventions occupational therapists can do. CONCLUSION: Many CI programs show positive results and should be studied more rigorously. Such promising programs should also be considered when decisions about post-acute TBI rehabilitation services for clients are being made. To further establish that post-acute TBI rehabilitation interventions improve CI, future studies should include intervention strategies based on injury severity, a control group, and longer term follow-up. The role of occupational therapy in these effective programs should be further explored.
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 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 | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".