Reaching a Consensus on the Definition of Telerehabilitation: World Federation of Neurorehabilitation Telerehabilitation Special Interest Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The research into and the adoption of telerehabilitation has greatly expanded over the last two decades. With this increasing level of interest in telerehabilitation there is a need for a comprehensive definition. The Telerehabilitation Special Interest Group of the World Federation of Neurorehabilitation is comprised of a diverse group of researchers from over 30 countries and so is well placed to reach a consensus on a definition of telerehabilitation and disseminate this widely. An e-Delphi approach was employed within the special interest group to reach a consensus on the definition. The agreed comprehensive definition of telerehabilitation includes a formal definition, an abbreviated version and a lay version, each with distinct purposes. A description of the scope of telerehabilitation is included, as well as an overview of the various modes of telerehabilitation. It is anticipated that this definition of telerehabilitation may assist researchers, clinicians, advocates and policy makers in a range of purposes.
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 | 0.118 | 0.099 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".