MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evidence synthesis of health policy and systems research in rehabilitation: a protocol for Cochrane overviews of systematic reviews on delivery, governance, financial arrangements, and implementation strategies

2025· article· en· W4406867990 on OpenAlexaff
Stefano Négrini, Carlotte Kiekens, Matteo Johann Del Furia, Silvia Minozzi, Rebecca Ryan, Chiara Arienti, Anne Parkhill, Pierre Côté, Francesca Gimigliano, Carla Sabariego, Paolo Capodaglio, Simon Décary, Wouter De Groote, Walter R. Frontera, Qhayiya Mudau, Melissa Atkinson-Graham, Noora Bakaa, Irene Battel, Olivier Karl Butzbach, Claudio Cordani, Eshetu Haileselassie Engeda, Theodore Konstantinidis, Giovanni Iolascon, Sara Liguori, Silvano Mior, Antimo Moretti, Marco Paoletta, Dima Touhami, Jessica J. Wong, Antony Duttine

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Ontario Institute of Technology
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)Systematic reviewCorporate governanceRehabilitationCochrane collaborationProcess managementMEDLINEMeta-analysisAlternative medicineFinancePhysical therapyBusinessCochrane LibraryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cochrane Rehabilitation and the World Health Organization (WHO) Rehabilitation Program are collaborating to produce four Cochrane overviews of systematic reviews that synthesize the current evidence from health policy and systems research (HPSR) in rehabilitation. They will focus on the four pillars of HPSR identified by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) taxonomy: delivery arrangements, financial arrangements, governance arrangements, and implementation strategies. The protocol describes why HPSR is currently needed in rehabilitation, provides detailed information on the four EPOC pillars in interaction with rehabilitation and reports the Cochrane methods that will be followed to produce the overviews. 1. Del Furia MJ, Minozzi S, Arienti C, Battel I, Capodaglio P, Côté P, Décary S, De Groote W, Duttine A, Frontera WR, Gimigliano F, Kiekens C, Mudau Q, Ryan R, Sabariego C, Negrini S. Delivery arrangements for rehabilitation services in health systems: an overview of systematic reviews. 2. Gimigliano F, Arienti C, Butzback OK, Capodaglio P, Côté P, Décary S, Del Furia MJ, De Groote W, Duttine A, Frontera WR, Iolascon G, Kiekens C, Liguori S, Minozzi S, Mudau Q, Negrini S, Paoletta M, Ryan R, Sabariego C, Moretti A. Financial arrangements for rehabilitation services in health systems: an overview of systematic reviews. 3. Atkinson-Graham M, Mior S, Bakaa N, Konstantinidis T, Wong J, Arienti C, Capodaglio P, Décary S, De Groote W, Del Furia MJ, Duttine A, Frontera WR, Kiekens C, Minozzi S, Gimigliano F, Mudau Q, Negrini S, Ryan R, Sabariego C, Côté P. Governance arrangements for rehabilitation services in health systems: an overview of systematic reviews. 4. Touhami D, Ryan R, Engeda EH, Arienti C, Capodaglio P, Côté P, Décary S, Del Furia MJ, De Groote W, Duttine A, Frontera WR, Gimigliano F, Kiekens C, Minozzi S, Mudau Q, Negrini S, Sabariego C. Implementation strategies for rehabilitation services in health systems: an overview of systematic reviews. The protocol is largely common to all four overviews. The individual parts of each overview can be identified by the sub-titles delivery arrangements, financial arrangements, governance arrangements, and implementation strategies for overviews 1 to 4.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.204
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.269
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2040.269
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0090.010
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.027
Bibliometrics0.0290.040
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0130.011
Open science0.0090.012
Research integrity0.0120.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0970.020

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 head0.184
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation MedicineSame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207