Occupational and Physical Therapy Activities and Level of Effort in Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury: Association With Functional Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although some attention has been given to the association of functional outcomes with rehabilitation intensity, the evidence is still sparse in this field. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of inpatient rehabilitation (IR) on discharge cognitive and motor function and the association of time spent in occupational and physical therapy and level of effort with cognitive and motor function in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). DESIGN: Secondary analysis of TBI-Practice Based Evidence dataset. SETTINGS: Inpatient rehabilitation. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred forty-nine patients with TBI who were consecutively admitted for IR between 2008 and 2011 in Ontario, Canada. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Admission and discharge Functional Independence Measure-Rasch Cognitive and Motor Scores. RESULTS: Patients showed significant improvement in cognitive and motor function from admission to discharge (P < .0001). After controlling for confounding factors, discharge FIM-Rasch cognitive and motor scores were not associated with either level of effort or time spent in physical therapy activities. Discharge motor, but not cognitive function, was associated with more time spent in the complex (β = 0.20, confidence interval [CI] 0.005, 0.05) and less time spent in simple OT activities (β = -0.13, CI -0.13, -0.01). CONCLUSION: This study provides valuable information for clinicians about the effectiveness of IR on the improvement of motor and cognitive outcomes and the importance of considering the amount of time spent in activities based on their level of complexity rather than the total time of therapy to improve motor outcomes in this population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".