Cognitive status and rehabilitation outcomes of patients in acute rehabilitation post Covid-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective This study aims to 1) characterize cognitive functioning in patients admitted for inpatient rehabilitation due to Covid-19 diagnosis and 2) examine how cognitive status at admission is associated with rehabilitation outcomes. Design Retrospective chart review. Setting An inpatient rehabilitation center located in Chicago, Illinois. Participants 80 participants in acute rehabilitation due to Covid-19 disease Intervention Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures Cognitive functioning as measured by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and rehabilitation outcomes as measured by Functional Index Measure (FIM) and Section GG items for self-care and mobility (GG-SC and GG-M respectively). Results On average, our sample presented with mild cognitive impairment as assessed by the (MoCA). The most significant deficits were demonstrated in executive function, attention, language, and delayed free recall measures. Higher levels of overall cognitive function were associated with higher cognitive measures of rehabilitation outcomes. Weaker associations were observed with outcome measures of self-care and motor functioning. Conclusion Cognitive impairments are common in patients in acute rehabilitation due to Covid-19 and cognitive performance may help predict rehabilitation outcomes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".