Definition of the perceived self-care ability in stroke survivors living at home in the Middle East : a protocol for a Systematic Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background : A stroke brings about several adverse outcomes so that a stroke patient faces numerous physical, and sensory together with cognitive, and psychological disorders. These disorders influence patients’ perceived self-care ability. There is no agreement on what the perceived self- care ability in stroke patients living at home is. Because of various cultures and medical systems, such an ambiguity may be more serious when it comes to the Middle East countries compared to advanced ones. This Systematic Literature Review aims to summarize the literature on this concept and propose a definition which might help similar research on the stroke in the future. Methods : The databases PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDro, Web of Science, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, Index Medicus, EMRO, Google Scholar, Magiran, SID, IranDoc, and the stroke-related literature will individually be queried to retrieve related literature on the perceived self-care ability in stroke patients, using subject headings and appropriate MeSH terms. The inclusion and exclusion criteria will be developed and refined by the research team. Two independent reviewers will participate in each search stage including abstract/title and full-text screening, study selection, data collection, or quality assessment steps. We will restrict our search to articles published in the English language in biomedical journals since 1970 to 2018. The result will be tabuled, and meta-synthesis will be performed. Discussion: The results of this systematic literature review can present a more accurate definition of perceived self-care ability in stroke patients living at home in Middle East countries. Systematic review registration: CRD42018100520 Keywords: Perceived Self-care Ability, Stroke, Home, Systematic Literature Review, Definition, Middle East
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 | 0.124 | 0.121 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.009 |
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".