The Community Rehabilitation Assessment: patient and clinician-reported outcomes in ambulatory rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The interRAI Community Rehabilitation Assessment (CRA) is a comprehensive health assessment designed to collect essential health and function information for rehabilitation care planning, benchmarking, and evaluation of clinic and home-based programs. A portion of the CRA is completed through patient self-report. The objective of this study was to demonstrate how the CRA can be used to describe the baseline clinical characteristics of patients participating in ambulatory rehabilitation programs and measure change across numerous domains of function, health, and wellbeing over time. Design: Cohort study. Setting and participants: = 210). Methods: Frequency responses and means were compared between admission and discharge from the ambulatory rehabilitation programs. Measures of interest included self-reported difficulty in completing instrumental activities of daily living, locomotion, fear of falling, and pain. Results: Significant improvement relative to at admission was detected for the overall cohort and both sub-samples on individual instrumental activities of daily living, stair difficulty, use of mobility aides, distance walked, fear of falling, and pain. Conclusions and implications: The standardized and comparable information collected by the CRA is expected to provide clinicians, clinic, and health system administrators with essential health and function information that can be used for care planning, benchmarking, and evaluation.
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 | 0.006 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".