Skill reacquisition after acquired brain injury: A holistic habit retraining model of neurorehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Persistent cognitive, emotional and behavioral dysfunction following brain injury present formidable challenges in the area of neurorehabilitation. This paper reviews a model and practical methodology for community based neurorehabilitation based upon: 1. Evidence from the "automatic learning" and "errorless learning" literature for skills relearning after brain injury; 2. A widely applicable task analytic approach to designing relevant skills retraining protocols; 3. Analysis of organic, reactive, developmental, and characterological obstacles to strategy utilization and relearning, and generation of effective therapeutic interventions; and 4. Procedures for (a) promoting rehabilitative strategy use adapted to acute and chronic neurologic losses, (b) an individual's inherent reinforcement preferences and coping style, (c) reliant on naturalistic reinforcers which highlight relationships to functional goals, utilize social networks, and (d) employ a simple and appealing cognitive attitudinal system and set of procedures. This Holistic Habit Retraining Model and methodology integrates core psychotherapeutic and learning principles as rehabilitation process ingredients necessary for optimal facilitation of skills retraining. It presents a model that generates practical, utilitarian strategies for retraining adaptive cognitive, emotional, behavioral and social skills, as well as strategies for overcoming common obstacles to utilizing methods that promote effective skills acquisition.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".