MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120022733 · doi:10.3233/wor-203356

Telework and telerehabilitation programs for workers with a stroke during the COVID-19 pandemic: A commentary

2021· article· en· W3120022733 on OpenAlexaff
Vahideh Moradi, Taher Babaee, Elham Esfandiari, Shannon B. Lim, Ramin Kordi

Bibliographic record

VenueWork · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelerehabilitationPandemicStroke (engine)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)RehabilitationTelemedicineMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationTelehealthQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyDiseaseHealth careNursingPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, rehabilitation facilities have become less accessible for patients with a stroke. Lack of early, intensive rehabilitation misses the opportunity for recovery during the critical time window of endogenous plasticity and improvement post-stroke. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this commentary was to highlighting the benefits of telework and telerehabilitation programs for workers with a stroke during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Relevant publications regarding the management of individuals with a stroke, telerehabilitation and teleworking in the setting of COVID-19 were reviewed. RESULTS: Previous studies showed that telerehabilitation can effectively provide an alternate method of promoting recovery for patients with a stroke. With the physical distancing precautions in place for mitigating viral spread, teleworking can also provide a method for long term recovery and improvements in quality of life after a stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this commentary addresses the benefits of physically distant, safe and effective alternatives to support individuals who live with a stroke during COVID-19 pandemic.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.080
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.080
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0290.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.298
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorkSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207