Prestroke Frailty and Functional Outcomes After Inpatient Stroke Rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Stroke is a leading cause of long-term disability, often requiring inpatient rehabilitation. Frailty, characterized by reduced physiological reserve and vulnerability to stressors, is associated with poorer outcomes. This study examined the association between prestroke frailty and functional recovery during inpatient rehabilitation. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of 224 stroke patients admitted between 2020 and 2022; 206 were included in the analysis. Prestroke frailty was assessed using the Clinical Frailty Scale, and rehabilitation outcomes were measured using Functional Independence Measure gain and efficiency. Associations were evaluated using Spearman correlations and linear regression. RESULTS: Of 206 patients, 42.7% were female and 75.7% were aged ≥60. Functional Independence Measure gain and efficiency did not differ significantly across Clinical Frailty Scale categories ( P > 0.05). Clinical Frailty Scale was not correlated with Functional Independence Measure gain ( r = -0.07, P = 0.316) or efficiency ( r = 0.02, P = 0.755). Admission and discharge Functional Independence Measure scores differed across Clinical Frailty Scale categories ( P = 0.041 and P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Although patients with higher prestroke frailty had lower functional scores at admission and discharge, functional improvement and efficiency did not differ significantly. However, the small number of patients with moderate to severe frailty (6.8%) may have limited the ability to detect a difference.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".