MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Deep Learning-based Temporal-Spatial Model for Stroke Rehabilitation Posture Estimation using StrokePoseNet

2025· article· W4416874399 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Priya Matharasi D, Senthilkumar Chandramohan, B Muthukumar, R. Thamizharasan, Deepak Arumugam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationStroke (engine)Convolutional neural networkDeep learningArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stroke rehabilitation plays a crucial role in restoring motor functions in patients suffering from neurological impairments. Accurate posture prediction and assessment during physiotherapy sessions are vital for tracking recovery and guiding therapeutic interventions. In this study, proposed StrokePoseNet(SPN) a novel temporal-spatial deep learning architecture designed to predict and classify rehabilitation postures based on joint coordinate sequences. Our approach combines 1D Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) to extract spatial features from individual frames and Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks to capture temporal dependencies across sequences. Utilized the publicly available Toronto Rehabilitation Stroke Pose Dataset, which includes posture sequences of stroke patients performing various rehabilitation exercises. SPN was trained and evaluated using standard machine learning metrics, achieving a classification accuracy of 96.42% and a balanced F1-score of 95.99%. Comparative analysis with baseline models such as Random Forest, SVM, and standalone CNN or LSTM architectures confirmed StrokePoseNet’s superior performance. The outcomes reinforce that the model can be implemented in real-time scenarios in the clinical setting, proposing a data-based method to monitor stroke treatment through the form of intelligent physiotherapy frameworks.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→