WITHDRAWN: Distributional Impacts of AI-Enhanced Telerehabilitation on Functional Recovery: A Recentered Influence Function Quantile Regression Decomposition Analysis
Tan, W. L.; Mukhopadhyay, A.
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 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Rest the Brain to Learn New Gait Patterns after Stroke 92%
- Towards AI-based Precision Rehabilitation via Contextual Model-based Reinforcement Learning 92%
- Positive effects of functional electrical stimulation-assisted cycling on perception of effort, cerebral blood flow and cognition in post-stroke patients 92%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Effects of bilateral and unilateral mental practice on actual motor performance and event-related desynchronization 93%
- A machine learning approach to identifying important features for achieving step thresholds in individuals with chronic stroke 92%
- Considerations for ensuring safety during telerehabilitation of people with stroke. A protocol for a scoping review 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Longitudinal trajectories of global and domain-specific cognition after stroke using the Oxford Cognitive Screen 92%
- Trial of high-intensity gait training and step monitoring for stroke 92%
- Cerebri:a web-app to reduce door-to-treatment decision time and improve guideline adherence in acute ischaemic stroke 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.