Classifying Residual Stroke Severity Using Robotics-Assisted Stroke Rehabilitation: Machine Learning Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Stroke therapy is essential to reduce impairments and improve motor movements by engaging autogenous neuroplasticity. Traditionally, stroke rehabilitation occurs in inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation facilities. However, recent literature increasingly explores moving the recovery process into the home and integrating technology-based interventions. This study advances this goal by promoting in-home, autonomous recovery for patients who experienced a stroke through robotics-assisted rehabilitation and classifying stroke residual severity using machine learning methods. Objective Our main objective is to use kinematics data collected during in-home, self-guided therapy sessions to develop supervised machine learning methods, to address a clinician’s autonomous classification of stroke residual severity–labeled data toward improving in-home, robotics-assisted stroke rehabilitation. Methods In total, 33 patients who experienced a stroke participated in in-home therapy sessions using Motus Nova robotics rehabilitation technology to capture upper and lower body motion. During each therapy session, the Motus Hand and Motus Foot devices collected movement data, assistance data, and activity-specific data. We then synthesized, processed, and summarized these data. Next, the therapy session data were paired with clinician-informed, discrete stroke residual severity labels: “no range of motion (ROM),” “low ROM,” and “high ROM.” Afterward, an 80%:20% split was performed to divide the dataset into a training set and a holdout test set. We used 4 machine learning algorithms to classify stroke residual severity: light gradient boosting (LGB), extra trees classifier, deep feed-forward neural network, and classical logistic regression. We selected models based on 10-fold cross-validation and measured their performance on a holdout test dataset using F1-score to identify which model maximizes stroke residual severity classification accuracy. Results We demonstrated that the LGB method provides the most reliable autonomous detection of stroke severity. The trained model is a consensus model that consists of 139 decision trees with up to 115 leaves each. This LGB model boasts a 96.70% F1-score compared to logistic regression (55.82%), extra trees classifier (94.81%), and deep feed-forward neural network (70.11%). Conclusions We showed how objectively measured rehabilitation training paired with machine learning methods can be used to identify the residual stroke severity class, with efforts to enhance in-home self-guided, individualized stroke rehabilitation. The model we trained relies only on session summary statistics, meaning it can potentially be integrated into similar settings for real-time classification, such as outpatient rehabilitation facilities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".