MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936515282 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2019.00362

Advice to Rest for More Than 2 Days After Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Is Associated With Delayed Return to Productivity: A Case-Control Study

2019· article· en· W2936515282 on OpenAlexaff
Noah D. Silverberg, Thalia Otamendi

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersStrong
KeywordsMedicineRivermead post-concussion symptoms questionnaireTraumatic brain injuryBed restRest (music)Medical adviceConcussionInjury preventionPhysical therapyPoison controlPsychiatryEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Recent expert agreement statements and practice guidelines for mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) management no longer support advising patients to “rest until asymptomatic,” and instead recommend gradual return to activity after 1-2 days of rest. The present study aimed to: (i) document the current state of de-implementation of prolonged rest advice, (ii) identify patient characteristics associated with receiving this advice, and (iii) examine the relationship between exposure to this advice and clinical outcomes. Methods: In a case-control design, participants were prospectively recruited from two concussion clinics. They completed self-report measures at clinic intake (Rivermead Postconcussion Symptom Questionnaire, Personal Health Questionnaire-9, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7) as well as a questionnaire with patient, injury, and recovery characteristics and the question: “Were you advised by at least one health professional to rest for more than 2 days after your injury?” Results: Of the eligible participants (N=146), 82.9% reported being advised to rest for more than 2 days (exposure group). This advice was not associated with patient characteristics, including gender (95% CI odds ratio = 0.48–2.91), race (0.87–6.28) age (0.93–1.01), a history of prior mTBI(s) (0.21–1.20) or psychiatric problems (0.40– 2.30), loss of consciousness (0.23–2.10), or access to financial compensation (0.50–2.92). In generalized linear modeling, exposure to prolonged rest advice predicted return to productivity status at intake (B= -1.06, chi-squared(1)=5.28, p=0.02; 64.5% in the exposure group vs. 40.0% in the control were on leave from work/school at the time of clinic intake, 19.8% vs. 24% had partially returned, and 11.6% vs. 24% had fully returned to work/school). The exposure group had marginally (non-significantly) higher post-concussion, depression, and anxiety symptoms. Conclusions: mTBI patients continue to be told to rest for longer than expert recommendations and practice guidelines. This study supports growing evidence that prolonged rest after mTBI is generally unhelpful, as patients in the exposure group were less likely to have resumed work/school at 1-2 months post-injury. We could not identify patient characteristics associated with getting prolonged rest advice. Further exploration of who gets told to rest and who delivers the advice could inform strategic de-implementation of this clinical practice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.289 · 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.

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

Citations47
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207