MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400518142 · doi:10.1186/s12883-024-03700-5

Effectiveness of personalized rehabilitation in adults suffering from persistent concussion symptoms as compared to usual care: a randomized control trial protocol

2024· article· en· W4400518142 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nicholas Moser, Miloš R. Popović, Sukhvinder Kalsi‐Ryan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Neurology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health Network
FundersMitacs
KeywordsMedicineRivermead post-concussion symptoms questionnaireRehabilitationPhysical therapyConcussionSports medicineRandomized controlled trialPopulationProtocol (science)Physical medicine and rehabilitationNeurologyAlternative medicineInjury preventionPoison controlPsychiatryInternal medicineEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Symptoms reported by patients who sustain a concussion are non-specific. As such, clinicians are better able to manage patients when a standardized clinical exam is performed to sub-type the driver(s) of symptoms. Aerobic exercise and multimodal rehabilitation have consistently shown to be a possibly effective means to manage this population; however, the optimal training prescription is unclear. Thus, there is a need to further examine the effectiveness of personalized rehabilitative treatments. Our primary aim is to evaluate the response to personalized therapy on recovery, as measured by The Rivermead Post-concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPQ) when compared to an active control. Methods We will conduct a multi-center 12-week case-crossover randomized controlled trial. 50 participants will be recruited from out-patient University Health Network clinics and community-based clinical practices around the greater Toronto area. Participants will be randomized at baseline to Group A: a personalized care program followed by an active control or Group B: an active control followed by a personalized care program. Participants will be included should they be 21 years of age and older and have symptoms that have persisted beyond 4 weeks but less than 1 year. Participants will undergo 6-weeks of care in their respective streams. After 6-weeks, participants will undergo a re-examination. They will then crossover and undertake the alternative treatment for 6 weeks. At the end of 12 weeks, participants will undertake the endpoint examinations. The primary outcome will be the Rivermead Postconcussion Questionnaire (RPQ). The secondary outcomes will be changes in standardized clinical examination, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and an electroencephalography (EEG) via NeuroCatch ™ . The statistical analysis to be performed is composed of an adjusted model using an analysis of variance, specifically using an unpaired t-test to test for associations between variables and outcomes. Discussion Given the recommendations from reviews on the topic of rehabilitation for adults with persistent concussion symptoms, we are undertaking a controlled trial. The documented high costs for patients seeking care for persistent symptoms necessitate the need to evaluate the effectiveness of a personalized rehabilitative program compared to the current standard of care. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT06069700.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC NeurologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207