Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations Rehabilitation, Recovery, and Community Participation Following Stroke, Part Three: Optimizing Activity and Community Participation Following Stroke, 7th Edition Update, 2025
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The 7th edition update of the Rehabilitation, Recovery and Community Participation module is presented in three parts. Part Three of the series reflects the current research evidence focused on person-centered care, optimizing an individual's return to their community and engaging in active and meaningful participation. Emphasis is placed on regular healthcare follow-up, maximizing secondary prevention strategies, assessment, diagnosis, and management of mood disorders and cognitive status, sleep health, and post-stroke fatigue. Personal issues that are important and meaningful to individuals with stroke are addressed, including returning to driving, vocational roles, relationships, sexuality, life roles, leisure, social participation, advance care planning, and palliative care. This module highlights the need for coordinated and seamless systems of care that extend beyond the first few months after stroke, building on progress achieved during the initial recovery, to support seamless longer-term recovery. The main goal of these recommendations is to help individuals with stroke achieve as much independence as possible in meaningful life roles and leisure activities. Successful planning across transitions requires integrated and coordinated people-centered efforts by all stroke team members and the broader community. Active engagement of the individual and family at all stages of planning and goal setting is essential.
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 | 0.008 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.011 |
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".