A framework of research priorities in COVID rehabilitation from the Rehabilitation Science Research Network for COVID: an international consultation involving qualitative and quantitative research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To identify research priorities related to COVID rehabilitation from the perspectives of persons with lived experiences, clinicians, researchers, community organization and policy representatives.Materials & Methods We conducted five international consultations to identify key issues and research priorities in COVID rehabilitation using (i) web-based questionnaires, (ii) synchronous discussions, and (iii) content analysis of COVID rehabilitation research conference presentations. We collated responses and notes and then analyzed data using content analytical techniques.Results The Framework of Research Priorities in COVID Rehabilitation includes five priorities that span health and disability across COVID-19 and Long COVID illness trajectories: (1) understanding experiences of episodic disability; (2) assessing episodic disability; (3) identifying and examining safe approaches to rehabilitation; (4) examining the role, implementation, and impact of models of rehabilitation care; and (5) examining access to safe, timely and appropriate rehabilitation and other health care provider services. The Framework identifies target populations, methodological considerations, and highlights the importance of integrated knowledge translation and exchange in advancing scientific evidence, clinical education, practice, and COVID rehabilitation policy.Conclusions This Framework provides a foundation to advance COVID, disability and rehabilitation research to advance the health and well-being of persons with COVID-19, Long COVID, and their caregivers.Implications for rehabilitationPersons with COVID-19 or Long COVID and their caregivers may experience multi-dimensional forms of disability spanning physical, cognitive, emotional health challenges, difficulties with daily function, and social inclusion, which individually and/or collectively may be unpredictable, episodic and/or chronic in nature.Rehabilitation has a role in preventing or mitigating disability and enhancing health outcomes for persons with COVID-19, Long COVID and their caregivers.The Framework of Research Priorities COVID Rehabilitation includes five overlapping research priorities spanning health and disability across COVID trajectories: (1) understanding experiences of episodic disability; (2) assessing episodic disability; (3) identifying and examining safe approaches to rehabilitation; (4) examining the role, implementation, and impact of models of rehabilitation care; and (5) examining access to safe, timely and appropriate rehabilitation and other health care provider services.The research priorities in the Framework represent a comprehensive approach to examine disability and rehabilitation across COVID illness trajectories and the broad continuums of rehabilitation care to provide a coordinated and collaborative approach to advancing evidence in COVID disability and rehabilitation.This Framework provides a foundation for international and interdisciplinary collaborations, to advance COVID disability and rehabilitation research to enhance health outcomes of persons with COVID-19, Long COVID, and their caregivers.
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 | 0.548 | 0.312 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.040 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.032 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.051 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".