Back

WITHDRAWN: Distributional Impacts of AI-Enhanced Telerehabilitation on Functional Recovery: A Recentered Influence Function Quantile Regression Decomposition Analysis

Tan, W. L.; Mukhopadhyay, A.

2026-03-16 rehabilitation medicine and physical therapy
10.64898/2026.02.08.26345880 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundConventional evaluations of digital health interventions typically assess mean treatment effects, potentially masking heterogeneous impacts across the functional recovery distribution. Patients at the lower and upper tails of recovery trajectories may respond differently to AI-enhanced telerehabilitation, yet standard regression approaches cannot capture these distributional nuances. ObjectiveThis study applied Recentered Influence Function (RIF) quantile regression with Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition to examine how AI-enhanced telerehabilitation differentially affects functional recovery outcomes across the entire distribution, and to decompose observed disparities into explained (composition) and unexplained (structure) components. MethodsWe analyzed data from 486 post-stroke patients across three rehabilitation centres in Singapore (January 2023-December 2025). Patients received either AI-enhanced telerehabilitation (n=241) incorporating natural language processing-based progress monitoring and adaptive exercise prescription, or standard care (n=245). RIF-quantile regressions were estimated at the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th quantiles of the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) score distribution. Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition at each quantile partitioned group differences into composition effects (attributable to differences in observable characteristics) and structure effects (attributable to differential returns to those characteristics). ResultsThe AI-enhanced telerehabilitation group demonstrated significantly greater FIM improvements across all quantiles, with the largest effects at the 10th quantile ({beta} = 12.74, 95% CI: 8.92-16.56, p < 0.001) and 25th quantile ({beta} = 9.83, 95% CI: 6.71-12.95, p < 0.001), diminishing at the 90th quantile ({beta} = 3.21, 95% CI: 0.88-5.54, p = 0.007). RIF decomposition revealed that at the 10th quantile, 68.3% of the treatment-control gap was attributable to structure effects, indicating that AI-enhanced telerehabilitation fundamentally altered recovery mechanisms for lower-performing patients rather than merely leveraging differences in patient characteristics. ConclusionsAI-enhanced telerehabilitation produces its most pronounced benefits among patients at the lower end of the functional recovery distribution, suggesting a potential mechanism for reducing outcome inequality in stroke rehabilitation. RIF-quantile regression decomposition offers a methodologically rigorous framework for understanding distributional treatment effects that are invisible to conventional mean-focused analyses.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.3%
2
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.2%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 7%
10.0%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.3%
5
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
6.3%
50% of probability mass above
6
Stroke
35 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.2%
7
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.5%
8
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.5%
9
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.6%
10
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.0%
11
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
12
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.6%
13
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
14
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
15
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.9%
16
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
17
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
18
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 17%
0.9%
19
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
20
Journal of Neural Engineering
197 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
21
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
22
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 64%
0.7%