Effectiveness and feasibility of real-time telerehabilitation for elderly people with musculoskeletal conditions: a systematic review (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Effectiveness of real-time telerehabilitation (RTTR) were evaluated in this systematic review on physical performance, adherence, and cost-effectiveness among elderly people with musculoskeletal condition. OBJECTIVE A systematic electronic literature search was conducted in Cochrane, PubMed/MEDLINE and PEDro according to PRISMA guidelines. METHODS Systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted in the area that involved elderly people with musculoskeletal conditions and any physical performance indexes were included. video conference and phone call were kind of RTTR was defined as a specific remote rehabilitation intervention to allowing healthcare professional/patient interaction. Information regarding the effect and feasibility (intervention completion rate) of RTTR was extracted from eligible articles. This study is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42021287289 RESULTS Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for revised randomized trials to assess methodological quality of the included articles. Eventually, seven studies were included as eligible articles. The overall risk of bias judgment was assessed as “High” in one studies. All studies were conducted in either South Korea, Canada, Italy, the USA, or Australia, and heterogeneity in terms of participants’ health condition and intervention regimen was observed across the studies. Our narrative-based analysis were reported across the seven studies showed that compared with conventional rehabilitation, either equal or better effects on physical performance. The intervention completion rates were 87%± 9 on average (range 67–97%). CONCLUSIONS Although our studies were limited relevant information with heterogeneity make obtain we could not conclusive evidence, our findings suggest that RTTR can be a strategy for rehabilitation service delivery with acceptable feasibility comparable to conventional rehabilitation for elderly people with musculoskeletal. CLINICALTRIAL the PROSPERO registration number CRD42021287289; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/
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 | 0.023 | 0.075 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".