Protocol for a cost–utility analysis of neurostimulation and intensive camp-based therapy for children with perinatal stroke and hemiparesis based on a multicentre clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Perinatal stroke leads to cerebral palsy (CP) and lifelong disability for thousands of Canadian children. Hemiparesis, referring to impaired functionality in one side of the body, is a common complication of perinatal stroke. Standard long-term care for hemiparetic CP focuses on rehabilitation therapies. Early research suggests that patients with hemiparesis may benefit from adjunctive neuromodulation treatments such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). tDCS uses electric current to stimulate targeted areas of the brain non-invasively, potentially enhancing the effects of motor learning therapies. This protocol describes an economic evaluation to be conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess the incremental cost of tDCS added to a camp-based therapy compared with camp-based therapy alone per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained in children with hemiparetic CP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Stimulation for Perinatal Stroke Optimising Recovery Trajectories (SPORT) trial is a multicentre RCT evaluating tDCS added to a 2-week camp-based therapy for children aged 6-18 years with perinatal ischaemic stroke and disabling hemiparetic CP affecting the upper limb. Outcomes are assessed at baseline, 1 week, 2 months and 6 months following intervention. Cost and quality of life data are collected at baseline and 6 months and results will be used to conduct a cost-utility analysis (CUA). The evaluation will be conducted from the perspectives of the public healthcare system and society. The CUA will be conducted over a 6-month time horizon. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the SPORT trial and the associated economic evaluation has been given by the research ethics boards at each of the study sites. The findings of the economic evaluation will be submitted for publication in a peer reviewed academic journal and submitted for presentation at conference. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03216837; Post-results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.055 | 0.100 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.117 | 0.018 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".