Occupational Therapist-Led Remedial Vision Program after Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Pre/Post Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Vision disorders are common after mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and can affect occupational performance. The study was designed to support occupational therapy’s role in providing remedial vision rehabilitation (RVR) by demonstrating changes in vision efficiency and patient reports of vision-related occupational performance in adult patients with a mTBI after occupational therapy-led RVR. Method: In this retrospective study, data was collected pre/post-RVR treatment at an outpatient clinic using a convenience sample of adults 18 years of age and older with vision disorder diagnosis and mTBI diagnosis. Vertical/horizontal saccades, vergence jumps, near-point convergence, Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey (CISS), and Canadian Occupational Performance Measurement (COPM) were measured before and after RVR. Results: Statistically significant changes were found in all outcome measurement scores after RVR with a large-size effect using t-test analysis. (Vertical saccades: t = -2.71; p = .022. Horizontal saccades t = -3.87; p = .003. Vergence jumps t =- 4.98; p= .001 Conclusions: Evidence-based RVR after mTBI injury may improve vision efficiency disorders and vision-related occupational performance and satisfaction, demonstrating occupational therapy’s distinct role.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; 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".