MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312323088 · doi:10.1016/j.bas.2022.101172

Pre-rehabilitation scores of functioning measured using the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule in persons with non-specific low back pain: A scoping review

2022· review· en· W4312323088 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica J. Wong, Astrid DeSouza, Sheilah Hogg‐Johnson, Wouter De Groote, Hamid Varmazyar, Silvano Mior, Paula H. Stern, Danielle Southerst, Stephanie Alexopulos, Melissa Belchos, Margareta Nordin, Kent Murnaghan, Alarcos Cieza, Pierre Côté, Nadège Lemeunier

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain and Spine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsCentre for Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationScheduleLow back painPsychologyInternational Classification of Functioning, Disability and HealthMedicineAlternative medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Knowledge of pre-rehabilitation generic status of functioning in individuals with low back pain (LBP) is necessary to understand the clinical utility of rehabilitation care.However, this information is lacking.We conducted a scoping review to describe pre-rehabilitation functioning status of persons with non-specific LBP using World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS)-36 or WHODAS-12.Data Sources:

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.007
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBrain and SpineSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207