Participants’ Perspectives on Joining a Virtual Rehabilitation Program for Long COVID: A Qualitative Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Rationale: Our team has completed a randomized controlled trial of virtual rehabilitation in long COVID. Given the diverse range of symptoms reported in individuals with long COVID and with an ongoing debate on the role of exercise for this condition, questions persist regarding the willingness to engage in this type of intervention. We aimed to explore the perspectives of individuals with long COVID who underwent an 8-week virtual rehabilitation program on their confidence in performing exercises at home as part of virtual rehabilitation program, their reaction when offered to participate in the program and reasons for participating in the trial. Methods: The study randomized 132 individuals with long COVID into either an intervention group (receiving 8-week virtual rehabilitation program along with education and usual care) or a control group (receiving usual care only). Thirteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants of the intervention group at the end of their 8-week program. Each interview was conducted individually via Zoom by an experienced female research associate and was digitally recorded. The data were analyzed using Deductive Thematic Analysis. Results: We identified three preliminary themes: 1) Confidence, guidance, and concerns: Most participants expressed confidence in performing exercises at home. Some participants, while feeling prepared to start exercising, were waiting to receive proper guidance by a professional. A few participants had concerns regarding their ability to perform exercises, post-exertional malaise symptoms, or time commitment. 2) “I'm the lucky one": When finding out they had been assigned to the exercise group, all participants expressed positive feelings such as being “happy,” “enthusiastic,” and “hopeful”. Some described as being the “lucky one” and “being looked after.” 3) Potential benefits and contribution to science: Participants’ reasons for joining the trial were multifaceted. They were seeking answers to better understand their new health condition, hoping to improve their symptoms and physical condition, and access essential health services through the trial. Additionally, they wanted to contribute scientific knowledge to help those experiencing similar challenges. Conclusion: Our findings reveal that participants felt confident and motivated to engage in the virtual rehabilitation program, reassured by professional support and driven by personal health goals and a desire to contribute to research on long COVID.
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 | 0,022 | 0,033 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 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 ».