Predicting rehabilitation treatment helpfulness to stroke patients: A supervised learning approach
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
Stroke (Cerebral vascular accident, CVA) is a common and serious disease. Most of the survivals would be disabled after their illness recovery, causes serious burden on caregivers. It is said that rehabilitation could help functional recovery of stroke patients, regain independence after stroke. Due to the long course of stroke, how to prevent survivals from recurrence is an important issue. This study attempts to examine the relationship between stroke recurrence and strength of rehabilitation, and build a stroke recurrence prediction model utilizing a number of supervised learning techniques to assist physicians with making clinical decisions.In the past, most of the related work used the samples from a single hospital as a sample, but it cannot fully catch all the clinic information of the patients. Therefore, this study used the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database 2010 of the NHIRD as the data source, to examine the effectiveness of rehabilitation.In terms of accuracy rate of all classifiers, we get the best effectiveness (78%) while adopting the inpatient admission dataset and C4.5 to predict recurrence. We also find physical therapy, occupational therapy and speech therapy treatments during inpatient admission are the key factors to decrease the chance to recrudesce in the rehabilitation periods. The higher strength and frequency rehabilitation treatment is also the key influence variables in our high accuracy prediction model which means that is useful to lower the recurrence rate of stroke patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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