MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408919544 · doi:10.48047/bfty6v49

Perception About Upper Limb Functional Recovery, Barriers And Use Of Training Devices Among Stroke Survivors -A Cross Sectional Survey.

2025· article· en· W4408919544 on OpenAlexaff
Nawaj Mehtab Pathan, Sampada Kamlakar, Rahul Saxena, Chandan Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueCuestiones de Fisioterapia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsCanadian Physiotherapy Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCross-sectional studyPerceptionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationStroke (engine)PsychologyMedicinePhysical therapyNeuroscienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The ability to use one’s arms is vital for daily tasks, social interactions, and quality of life. However, 33% to 66% of stroke survivors fail to regain upper limb function within six months, hindering rehabilitation and reintegration. Self-perception evaluations show minimal influence from the WHO's ICF domains, emphasizing the need for a patient-centered approach. Participatory Action Research (PAR), widely used in community health, offers a collaborative framework for rehabilitation. However, research on Indian stroke patients' attitudes and recovery goals is limited, highlighting the need for tailored strategies addressing their expectations and challenges.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.270 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCuestiones de FisioterapiaSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207