MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223562424 · doi:10.1080/02699052.2022.2059815

Characteristics, Outcomes, Sex and Gender Considerations of Community-Based Physical Activity Interventions after Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: Scoping Review

2022· article· en· W4223562424 on OpenAlexafffund
Enrico Quilico, Christophe Alarie, Bonnie Swaine, Angela Colantonio

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Injury · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCINAHLInternational Classification of Functioning, Disability and HealthPsychological interventionMEDLINEMedicineTraumatic brain injuryPsycINFOInclusion (mineral)Intervention (counseling)Poison controlPhysical therapyPsychologyClinical psychologyGerontologyFamily medicinePsychiatryRehabilitationMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This scoping review mapped the current evidence about community-based physical activity (PA) interventions for individuals with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) and identified the reported health-related outcomes, measurement tools used, and considerations given to sex and gender. METHODS: Searches were conducted in six academic databases for peer-reviewed articles (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and PEDro). PRISMA Scoping Review guidelines were followed. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion and extracted data for the analysis with a modified Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT). Health-related outcomes were classified with domains of the International Classification of Function, Disability and Health (ICF). RESULTS: = 12.74, SD = 3.51 items), with limited details for replication. ICF outcomes focused on improving body functions (74%), activities and participation (14%), environmental factors (1%), and other: not covered (11%). Only four studies (21%) stratified their results by sex or gender. CONCLUSIONS: Identified PA interventions from this review revealed common characteristics that led to improved outcomes. Proposed recommendations aim to improve future research and community practice. There is a pressing need for more sex and gender considerations in PA research after moderate-to-severe TBI.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.093
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.007
Bibliometrics0.0110.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain InjurySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207