MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413210886 · doi:10.32782/2411-3034-2025-37-9

Analysis of International Experience in Spatial Organization of Rehabilitation Centers for People with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)

2025· article· en· W4413210886 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daria Pryimak, Dmytro Antoniuk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMarine and Coastal Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationTraumatic stressPsychologyStress (linguistics)Posttraumatic stressClinical psychologyPsychiatryNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is to analyze international experience in the spatial organization of rehabilitation centers for individuals with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and evaluate the impact of architectural solutions on the effectiveness of rehabilitation processes. The paper examines the experience of organizing such centers in various countries, including the USA, Israel, Germany, the UK, Canada, and Australia, with a focus on architectural approaches, planning solutions, and functional zoning. The research methods include the systematization and generalization of international experience in designing rehabilitation centers. The article discusses principles of integrating the natural environment into the architecture of rehabilitation institutions, the usage of open landscape areas, recreational spaces, natural materials, and inclusive design. The relevance of this work lies in the need to improve approaches to designing rehabilitation centers in Ukraine to enhance conditions for the rehabilitation of individuals with PTSD. The results of the study allow to formulate recommendations for creating a comfortable and functional therapeutic environment for patients in rehabilitation facilities.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, 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 topicMarine and Coastal ResearchFrench-language works237,207