Can We Associate the Hours of Clinical Services at the Rehabilitation Outcomes?
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
The purpose of this study was to determine the effects on the elderly of clinical interventions by professionals from a visual impairment rehabilitation program, more specifically, the effects on their daily life and the extent to which such interventions encourage social participation. In accordance with the conceptual framework of the Disability Creation Process, the clinical results of a population study group of 100 persons with various types of visual impairment enrolled in a rehabilitation program were analyzed as per the intensity of the clinical interventions (eg, hours of clinical services provided and dispensed by professionals). The results of the study tend to show that the hours of services accorded to a patient positively contribute to the progression of his or her Functional Global Profile as per the rehabilitation outcomes progression measures. In contrast, age and the spreading of services negatively contribute. The contributions of the study are innovative for assessing clinical effectiveness. For instance, the understanding of the relationship between the measurement of a patient's clinical results and the services that he or she has received should help us improve the practices and methods used in visual impairment rehabilitation.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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