MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000051889 · doi:10.1093/ptj/pzaa008

Effectiveness of an Evidence-Based Amputee Rehabilitation Program: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

2020· article· en· W3000051889 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health Outcomes
FundersRehabilitation Research and Development ServiceU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsRehabilitationMedicinePhysical therapyAmputationRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Physical medicine and rehabilitationClinical trialSurgeryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite the prevalence of lower limb amputation (LLA), only a small percentage of people with LLA actually receive physical therapy post amputation and are rehabilitated to their full potential level of function. There is a need for the development of a rehabilitation program that targets impairments and limitations specific to people with LLA. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine whether the Evidence-Based Amputee Rehabilitation program would improve functional mobility of people with unilateral transtibial amputation (TTA) who have already completed physical therapy and prosthetic training. DESIGN: This study was a randomized, wait-list control, single-blinded pilot clinical trial. SETTING: This study researched participants who had received postamputation rehabilitation to varying degrees, either in an inpatient and/or outpatient settings. PARTICIPANTS: The participants in this study included veterans and nonveterans with unilateral TTA due to dysvascular disease and trauma. INTERVENTION: This study included a prescription-based rehabilitation program for people with amputations. MEASUREMENTS: Results were measured with The Amputee Mobility Predictor with (AMPPro) and without a prosthesis (AMPnoPro) and 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) at baseline and at the end of the 8-week intervention. RESULTS: The intervention group improved on the AMPPro scores (36.4 to 41.7), AMPnoro scores (23.2 to 27.1), and 6MWT distance (313.6 to 387.7 m). The effect size for the intervention was very large (1.32). In contrast, the wait-list control group demonstrated no change in AMPPro scores (35.3 to 35.6), AMPnoPro scores (24.7 to 25.0), and 6MWT distance (262.6 m to 268.8 m). LIMITATIONS: The sample size was small. A total 326 potential candidates were screened with 306 unable to meet inclusion criteria or unwilling to participate. CONCLUSION: People with unilateral TTA who received Evidence-Based Amputee Rehabilitation program demonstrated significant improvement in functional mobility, with most participants (66.7%) improved at least 1 K-level (58.3%) and greater than the minimal detectable change (66.7%).

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 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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.271 · 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