Využití Mezinárodní klasifikace funkčních schopností, disability a zdraví a hodnotícího systému InterRAI u soběstačnosti pacientů po poškození mozku
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Bachelor thesis deals with the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health, ICF) and the evaluation system InterRAI (International Residential Assessment Instrument). The main goal of this work is to introduce these two tools and test a suggested form on patients with brain damage. The work has both theoretical and practical part. The theoretical part presents the classification ICF and the evaluation system InterRAI, their principles, goals and possibilities for their application. It also summarizes a Canadian study dealing with the relationship between these tools and the possibilities for combining units of InterRAI with codes of MKF. The practical part is focusing on the possible use of the evaluation system InterRAI based on application codes ICF for evaluating aspects of independency. The aim was to design a form, in which certain aspects of personal daily activities from the evaluation system InterRAI are equal to the domain of ICF. This form would at the same time contain a chart with a scoring system, which should help to determine the value of relevant qualities. The form has been tested on 10 patients with brain damage, stroke and traumatic brain damage. Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".