Development of community participation indicators to advance the quality of spinal cord injury rehabilitation: SCI-High Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community participation following spinal cord injury/disease (SCI/D) can be challenging due to associated primary impairments and secondary health conditions as well as difficulties navigating both the built and social-emotional environment. To improve the quality of SCI/D rehabilitation care to optimize community participation, the SCI-High Project developed a set of structure, process and outcome indicators for adults with SCI/D in the first 18 months after rehabilitation admission. A pan-Canadian Working Group of diverse stakeholders: (1) defined the community participation construct; (2) conducted a systematic review of available outcomes and their psychometric properties; (3) constructed a Driver diagram summarizing available evidence associated with community participation; and (4) prepared a process map. Facilitated meetings allowed selection and review of a set of structure, process and outcome indicators. The structure indicator is the proportion of SCI/D rehabilitation programs with availability of transition living setting/independent living unit. The process indicators are the proportion of SCI/D rehabilitation inpatients who experienced: (a) a therapeutic community outing prior to rehabilitation discharge; and, (b) those who received a pass to go home for the weekend. The intermediary and final outcome measures are the Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale and the Reintegration to Normal Living Index. The proposed indicators have the potential to inform whether inpatient rehabilitation for persons with SCI/D can improve self-efficacy and lead to high levels of community participation post-rehabilitation discharge.
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 | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".