Evaluation of Financial Support Workshops for Patients Under State Pension Age With Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Survey Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM), a form of slow-motion and progressive spinal cord injury caused by spinal cord compression secondary to degenerative pathology, leads to high levels of disability and dependence, and may reduce quality of life. Myelopathy.org is the first global scientific and clinical charity for DCM, providing an accessible platform freely disseminating information relevant to the DCM diagnosis and its treatment. Significant transient and long-term change to earnings do occur and can thrust individuals into poverty. People with DCM face many challenges accessing state financial assistance. This can have a cumulative negative financial effect due to the association between DCM and low socioeconomic index. Financial support available to patients under pension age include Universal Credit (UC), a payment that helps with living costs, and Personal Independence Payment (PIP), which helps with extra living costs if someone has both a long-term health condition or disability and difficulty doing certain everyday tasks. Objective: This study aimed to assess if delivering workshops centered around access to financial support could assist people with DCM living in the United Kingdom. Methods: A series of 2 internet-based workshops was targeted at accessing financial support for English patients under the state pension age, with an anonymized survey delivered to participants after each session. The first session was on UC and the second on PIP. The survey consisted of a mixture of Likert scales, free text and yes or no answers. Survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and free text answers underwent inductive thematic analysis. Results: The average rating on the use of UC was 9.00/10. Presession self-rated confidence levels were 5.11/10 rising to 8.00/10. The mean score of wanting further similar sessions was 8.67/10 with 56% (5/9) of participants wanting one-to-one sessions. For PIP, the average session use rating was 10/10. Presession self-rated confidence levels were 4.43/10 rising to 9.57/10. The mean score of wanting further similar sessions was 8.71/10, with 43% (3/7) of participants wanting one-to-one sessions . Following inductive thematic analysis, themes regarding the usefulness of such sessions and the challenges to accessing financial support emerged. One participant gave negative feedback, which included the length of the session and perceived problems around confidentiality and data protection. Conclusions: The pilot series was largely perceived as a success, with participants finding them useful and increasing their self-rated confidence in navigating the UK financial support system. Given the small sample size, it is hard to predict the success of future sessions. Finally, given that the hurdles in accessing financial support extend beyond DCM, such workshops may be relevant to other organizations.
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 | 0,010 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
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 ».