MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W49111933 · doi:10.3233/wor-2001-00170

Therapeutic Return to Work: Rehabilitation in the workplace

2001· article· en· W49111933 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWork · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsHôpital Charles-Le MoyneUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationWork (physics)NormativeOccupational therapyPhysical therapyNorm (philosophy)PsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Therapeutic Return to Work is a work rehabilitation program linking graded work exposure with functional restoration therapy for chronic low back pain. This study evaluates the impact of the program on stable return to work (RTW) and compares it with the impact on RTW of three frequently used ways of management of back pain (normative comparison). At two year follow-up, 93% of participants of the Therapeutic Return to Work program were working. This rate was higher than in the comparison groups. Although limited by its norm-referenced evaluation design, the results of this study indicate the importance of placing the work site in the center of the of work rehabilitation process. In this program occupational therapists make full use of the client's natural environment.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.277 · 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