The Importance of Sleep for Successful Neurorehabilitation after Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sleep has important clinical implications for neurorehabilitation after stroke. We aimed to systematically explore sleep (including naps) as an essential factor in the neurorehabilitation of patients after stroke. After titles and abstracts were screened, 49 full texts were reviewed, and 7 were included in this review. Data were extracted and assessed for quality and risk of bias. We looked at any neurorehabilitation setting, and compared sleep with no sleep and explored these factors in stroke patients versus healthy individuals. Rehabilitation is critical for many activities that may need to be learned or re-learned following stroke and for returning to everyday life. In this context, sleep is essential in neurorehabilitation and physical therapy practice as it supports neuroplasticity, memory, and learning. The available data suggest that sleep should be considered in the treatment plan for successfully targeted physiotherapy to optimize cognitive and motor learning. Physical therapists should advise about sleep hygiene and therapies to improve sleep, both quality and quantity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".