MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2576086277

Balance-Related Outcome Measures of Acquired Brain Injury Patients in a Student-Led Onsite Physical Therapy Clinic: A Retrospective Records Review

2016· article· en· W2576086277 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lauren M Wilson, Corey R Kaleshnik, Parke K Humphrey, Ann Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueSound Ideas (University of Puget Sound) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOutcome (game theory)Retrospective cohort studyBalance (ability)Physical therapyEmergency medicineSurgery
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Title: Balance-Related Outcome Measures of Acquired Brain Injury Patients in a Student-Led Onsite Physical Therapy Clinic: A Retrospective Records Review\nAuthors: Parke Humphrey, SPT; Corey Kaleshnik, SPT; Lauren Wilson, SPT; Ann Wilson, PT, MEd, GCS\nAffiliation(s): 1. Physical Therapy Program, University of Puget Sound\nPurpose: Individuals with Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) often have balance impairments. Interventions targeting these impairments may improve balance and thus increase overall societal participation. The purpose of this review was to identify the types of balance-related outcome measures used to assess balance impairments in patients with ABI in a student-led onsite physical therapy clinic.\nSubjects: 13 individuals with an ABI receiving care at a student-run clinic.\nMaterials & Methods: 23 records were selected for this review; however, only 13 of these met inclusion criteria. 12 subjects had a primary diagnosis of CVA and 1 subject had a primary diagnosis of TBI. The average number of balance measures per subject was 2.25 with all subjects having at least one measure taken. The mean age of the subjects was 59.8 years with a range of 35 to 85 years. The mean amount of time since ABI onset to the episode of care was 5.2 years with a range of 8 months to 21 years and a standard deviation of 4.8 years. The mean number of visits for our subjects in each episode of care was 12.4 with a range of 4 to 19 visits and a standard deviation of 4.9. The named balance measures we evaluated were the Berg Balance Scale, Dynamic Gait Index, Timed Up and Go, and the Mini-BESTest. Additionally there were subjects that were evaluated based on general static and dynamic balance.\nResults: The most commonly used recognized outcome measures were the Berg Balance Scale (N=8), Dynamic Gait Index (N=3), Timed up and Go (N=2) and the Mini-BESTest (N=2). In addition 8 records identified that either static or dynamic balance or both were assessed using other methods (N=8). Of the 13 subjects, 9 improved by a score greater than or equal to the MDC or MCID.\nConclusions: Although the majority of student therapists are using validated measures to assess balance, a number are assessing balance in other ways that make it difficult to determine which components of balance are being assessed or how successful the targeted interventions were. Despite this, meaningful change was seen in 69.2% (N=9) of subjects that were evaluated with recognized outcome measures.\nClinical Relevance: Meaningful change can be seen in patients with ABI who may be several years out from their original injury in relatively short episodes of care or with infrequent visits. While general balance measures might be appropriate to help inform a therapist’s decision-making process to work on specific deficits, this review highlights the importance of also including a named outcome measure to detect significant changes across many case studies.\nReferences\n1. What is the Difference Between an Acquired Brain Injury and a Traumatic Brain Injury. Brain Injury Association of America website. http://www.biausa.org/FAQRetrieve.aspx?ID=43913. Updated 2014. Accessed 8 November 2014.\n2. Caeyenberghs K, Leemans A, Geurts M, Taymans T, Vander Linden C, Smits-Engelsman BC, Sunaert S, Swinnen SP. Brain-behavior relationships in young traumatic brain injury patients: fractional anisotropy measures are highly correlated with dynamic visuomotor tracking performance. Neuropsychologia 2010 Apr;48(5):1472-82. Doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.01.017.\n3. Hoffer ME, Balough BJ, Gottshall KR. Posttraumatic balance disorders. Int Tinnitus J. 2007;13(1):69-72.\n4. Perry SB, Woollard J, Little S, Shroyer K. Relationships among measures of balance, gait, and community integration in people with brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2014;29(2):117-124. doi:10.1097/HTR.0b013e3182864f2f.\n5. Sartor-Glittenberg C, Brickner L. A multidimensional physical therapy program for individuals with cerebellar ataxia secondary to traumatic brain injury: a case series. Physiother Theory Pract 2014;30(2):138-148. doi:10.3109/09593985.2013.819952.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSound Ideas (University of Puget Sound)Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207