The relationship between prognostic factors and patient satisfaction with performance of self-identified goals following interdisciplinary mild traumatic brain injury rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals with persistent symptoms following a mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) demonstrate improved satisfaction with their performance of self-identified rehabilitation goals after completing a combined occupational therapy and physiotherapy group intervention. However, the relationship between factors associated with developing persistent symptoms following an mTBI and satisfaction with their performance of self-identified goals after completing an intervention are unknown. OBJECTIVE(S): To evaluate whether factors associated with developing persistent symptoms influence satisfaction with the performance of self-identified goals after completing a combined occupational therapy and physiotherapy group intervention. METHODS: During intake assessments, individuals with persistent mTBI symptoms completed the satisfaction section of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM-S), the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptom Questionnaire (RPQ), and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Seven-Item Scale (GAD-7). Participants re-rated their satisfaction with performance of self-identified goals using the COPM-S during their discharge assessment. The influence of age, sex, days since injury, education, mechanism of injury, baseline COPM-S, GAD-7, and RPQ scores on goal satisfaction ratings were analyzed using a binomial logistic regression. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-eight individuals (44.7 ± 13.6 years old) were included in this study, and 92% experienced a clinically important improvement in their goal satisfaction ratings after completing the intervention. Neither age, sex, days since injury, education, mechanism of injury, baseline COPM-S, GAD-7, or RPQ scores significantly influenced satisfaction with performance of self-identified goals. CONCLUSIONS: Factors associated with developing persistent symptoms following an mTBI did not influence goal satisfaction after completing a combined physiotherapy and occupational therapy group intervention.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".