MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1941338822 · doi:10.2522/ptj.20150117

Facilitating Community-Based Exercise for People With Stroke: Cross-Sectional e-Survey of Physical Therapist Practice and Perceived Needs

2015· article· en· W1941338822 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Carrie Lau, Danielle Chitussi, Sarah Elliot, Jennifer Giannone, Mary-Katherine McMahon, Kathryn M. Sibley, Alda Tee, Julie Matthews, Nancy M. Salbach

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkYork Central HospitalOntario Stroke NetworkToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCross-sectional studyPhysical therapistStroke (engine)PsychologyPhysical activityPhysical therapyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Educating people with stroke about community-based exercise programs (CBEPs) is a recommended practice that physical therapists are well positioned to implement. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the provision of education about CBEPs to people with stroke, barriers to providing education, and preferences for resources to facilitate education among physical therapists in neurological practice. DESIGN: A cross-sectional e-survey of physical therapists treating adults with stroke in Ontario, Canada, was conducted. METHODS: A link to the questionnaire was emailed to physical therapists in a provincial stroke network, a provincial physical therapy association, and on hospital and previous research lists. RESULTS: Responses from 186 physical therapists were analyzed. The percentage of respondents who reported providing CBEP education was 84.4%. Only 36.6% reported typically providing education to ≥7 out of 10 patients with stroke. Physical (90.5%) and preventative (84.6%) health benefits of exercise were most frequently discussed. Therapists reported most commonly delivering education at discharge (73.7%). Most frequently cited barriers to educating patients were a perceived lack of suitable programs (53.2%) and a lack of awareness of local CBEPs (23.8%). Lists of CBEPs (94.1%) or brochures (94.1%) were considered to be facilitators. The percentage of physical therapists providing CBEP education varied across acute, rehabilitation, and public outpatient settings. LIMITATIONS: The percentage of physical therapists providing education may have been overestimated if respondents who deliver CBEP education were more likely to participate and if participants answered in a socially desirable way. CONCLUSIONS: Even though a high proportion of physical therapists provide CBEP education, education is not consistently delivered to the majority of patients poststroke. Although a CBEP list or brochure would facilitate education regarding existing CBEPs, efforts to implement CBEPs are needed to help overcome the lack of suitable programs.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.474

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical TherapySame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207