MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1912679582

The Evolution and Evaluation of a Therapeutic Recreation Cottage Program for Persons with Spinal Cord Injury

2012· article· en· W1912679582 on OpenAlex
Sander L. Hitzig, Charlene Alton, Niclole Leong, Katherine Gatt

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTherapeutic Recreation Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationRecreational therapyRehabilitationSpinal cord injuryAffect (linguistics)Physical therapyIntervention (counseling)MedicinePsychologyNursingSpinal cordPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the Toronto Rehabilitation Institute’s (University Health Network) Spinal Cord Rehabilitation Program (SCRP) Cottage Program, which is a unique outdoor experiential therapy (OET) intervention for persons with spinal cord injury (SCI). The outcomes illustrate the evolution of a therapeutic recreation (TR) program, and the development and implementation of a program evaluation framework. Over time, the SCRP Cottage Program has evolved from a small, one-day TR unstructured program to a large four-day structured inter-professional OET. For the evaluation component, a pre-posttest survey design was employed with participants with SCI who attended the cottage program (n = 14) and with a control group (n = 7). Cottage participants completed surveys on their goals and satisfaction with the program, while both groups completed the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, Positive Affect and Negative Affect Scale and the Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale. Positive affect and self-efficacy increased over time in cottage participants, but not for controls. Overall, participants were highly satisfied with the cottage program. The findings provide a model for the development and evaluation of an OET aimed at improving well-being following SCI.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.220
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it