Seven-Year Intervention Rate and Effect of Early Rehabilitation in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The improvement of early rehabilitation service capacity is of great importance for meeting health needs of the population; however, there is still a lack of information on early rehabilitation interventions in hospitals in China. This study selected the first page data of 7,914,692 medical records suffered the stroke and brain injury, spinal cord injury, spinal and joint degeneration, fracture and sports injury from 1305 tertiary general hospitals in China from 2016 to 2022. We found that the rate of early rehabilitation intervention in tertiary general hospitals in China increased annually from 2016 to 2022, especially in 2020. The rate of early rehabilitation intervention in patients with complications was higher than that in patients without complications at 7 years. Regardless of complications, the mortality rate of patients undergoing early rehabilitation was lower than that of patients without early rehabilitation. However, the length of hospital stay and total cost were higher in patients undergoing early rehabilitation than those without early rehabilitation. The change in this indicator varied from province to province. This study combined quality improvement measures to summarize the experience of improving the early rehabilitation intervention rate in less developed countries.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".