MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965587298 · doi:10.3109/07380577.2011.621514

Individuals with Stroke Reporting Unmet Need for Occupational Therapy Following Discharge from Hospital

2011· article· en· W1965587298 on OpenAlexaff
Shari Duxbury, Vincent DePaul, Monica Alderson, Julie Moreland, Seanne Wilkins

Bibliographic record

VenueOccupational Therapy In Health Care · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupational therapyMedicineStroke (engine)Hospital dischargeMEDLINEMedical emergencyEmergency medicineIntensive care medicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to identify the characteristics and needs of individuals with stroke who report an unmet need for occupational therapy following discharge from hospital. Needs were assessed using a semi-structured interview and a survey in a sample of 209 adults hospitalized with a stroke. Participants were divided into three groups-those needing occupational therapy; those receiving occupational therapy, and those neither needing nor receiving occupational therapy. Thirteen percent (n = 28) reported an unmet need for occupational therapy and were more dependent in activities of daily living (ADL) before and after their stroke and had lower acute functional independence measure (FIM) scores than the comparison groups (p < .05). Participants with unmet needs for occupational therapy were more likely to report unmet needs related to upper extremity function, basic and instrumental ADL, leisure, assistive devices, and the resumption of social roles.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations17
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOccupational Therapy In Health CareSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207