The Impact of Two Telerehabilitation Supervision Schedules on Physical Activity, Mobility, and Balance Among People with Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Mixed-Method Single-Subject Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Many individuals who experience a moderate or severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) have long-term deficits in physical activity, balance, and mobility requiring specialized care. New delivery models are being investigated for interventions to address challenges caused by living in remote communities, difficulties with transportation, and/or physical distancing requirements. Determining the effectiveness of telerehabilitation is critical given the current movement toward remote health care delivery. Objective: We investigated the effectiveness of two teletherapy supervision schedules used to deliver a home-based, intensive exercise programme on 1) physical activity, mobility, balance, participation, and 2) concerns with falling, and satisfaction with life. Methods: A mixed methods approach with alternating single subject design (SSD) and interviews was used. Five individuals who experienced a moderate or severe TBI completed two intensive home-based telerehabilitation programmes. Programmes differed only by supervision schedule - daily or weekly. Impacts on objective and patient-reported outcomes were measured. Results: Four individuals demonstrated clinically significant improvements in physical activity level, balance, and mobility. One individual experienced less concerns with falling after both schedules, while two other individuals showed a trend in that direction after the weekly remote supervision. Important functional gains (i.e., improved balance and decreased fatigue) were also perceived and reported by family partners regardless of supervision schedule. Conclusion: Although the study has limitations, the findings indicate that exercise programmes delivered via telerehabilitation can improve balance and mobility as well as positively affect concerns with falling and physical activity levels for this population. No clear differences were seen between the two telerehabilitation supervision schedules.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".