Web-Based Health Coaching for Spinal Cord Injury: Results From a Mixed Methods Feasibility Evaluation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) are at high risk of experiencing secondary conditions like pressure injuries. Self-management programs may reduce the risk of complications, but traditional programs have proven to be insufficiently tailored to the needs of people with SCI. To overcome barriers to self-management support, a web-based, self-management program was developed for Canadians with SCI called SCI & U. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and potential impact of the SCI & U program in the context of a mixed methods pilot study. METHODS: The study followed an explanatory, sequential mixed methods design. Participants (N=11) were Canadians with SCI who had been living in the community for more than 1 year. Each took part in a self-paced, six-session self-management program guided by a trained peer health coach. During sessions, participants could discuss a health topic with their coach from a predefined list (eg, skin or bowel management). Quantitative data were gathered before and after program participation to assess program feasibility and impact. Feasibility measures included attrition rates, frequency of topics selected, and recorded goals, whereas impact measures included measures of self-efficacy (University of Washington Self-Efficacy Scale [UW-SES]), mood (Personal Health Questionnaire Depression Scale [PHQ-8]), secondary conditions (Spinal Cord Injury Secondary Conditions Scale [SCI-SCS]), and resilience (Spinal Cord Injury Quality of Life Resilience Scale [SCI-QOL-R]). Qualitative measures were based on postintervention interviews; these were designed to confirm and expand on quantitative. RESULTS: Of the 11 participants, 10 completed pre- and postassessments, and 6 coaching sessions. Sessions lasted between 31 and 81 min (average 55, SD 13), and the duration of the program ranged from 35 to 88 days (average 56, SD 23). Diet and exercise were selected as topics 40% (20/50 sessions with topics) of the time, whereas topics such as mental health, bladder management, pain, and bowel management were chosen less frequently. Results gathered before and after the pilot study demonstrated improvements with moderate effect sizes on the UW-SES and the electronic health literacy scale (ie, Hedges g>0.5). Effect sizes for measures of resilience (SCI-QOL-R), depression (PHQ-8), and secondary conditions (SCI-SCS) were small (ie, Hedges g>0.3). Qualitative results confirmed a common focus on diet and exercise, and defined coaches as sources of accountability, information, reassurance and affirmation, and emotional and technical support. CONCLUSIONS: Results demonstrated that a web-based self-management program is feasible and acceptable by Canadians with SCI. Results also indicated a web-based, peer-led self-management program may impact resilience, self-efficacy, mood, and secondary complications. Finally, results illuminated the role of the coach in facilitating behavior change. Future work seeks to validate results in the context of a randomized controlled trial.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,069 | 0,052 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».