Clinical Characteristics of Adults Living with a Spinal Cord Injury Across the Continuum of Care : A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: People living with a spinal cord injury (PwSCI) present numerous complications at a systemic level that negatively impact their physical and mental health as well as their quality of life. The purpose of this study was to describe the clinical profile of PwSCI living in nursing homes (NHs), Complex Continuing Care Systems (CCCs), home care (HC), and inpatient mental health facilities (MHs) in nine Canadian provinces and territories. Methods: We analyzed data collected with the following assessment tools: Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Minimum Data Set (RAI-MDS 2.0), RAI–MH, RAI-HC, Cognitive Performance Scale, Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Hierarchy Scale and impairments in instrumental ADLs (IADLs), Pain Scale, Changes in Health, End-Stage Disease, Signs, and Symptoms (CHESS) Scale, Depression Rating Scale, and Deafblind Severity Index (DBSI). We reported counts (n) and percentages (%) and performed Chi-square tests with a Bonferroni correction to determine the statistical significance of the differences in frequencies within and between care settings. Results: We identified 13,136 PwSCI, predominantly males and younger than comparison groups. PwSCI presented fewer comorbidities but reported higher pain than comparison groups. Almost all of the PwSCI in NHs (99.4%) and CCCs (98.9%) needed assistance to perform ADLs. Conclusions: The prevalence of comorbidities and impairments following SCI varies based on the clinical setting. The present clinical profile of PwSCI will inform interventions to improve health of PwSCI across the continuum of care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".