The Experience of Senior Stroke Survivors: Factors in Community Participation among Wheelchair Users
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This qualitative study investigated the lived experience of senior stroke survivors who used prescribed wheelchairs in their home and community. METHODS: The study involved semi-structured, in-depth interviews that were conducted with 10 participants, aged 70 to 80, who had used a wheelchair for a mean of 5.6 years. All participants used manual wheelchairs and two additionally used a power wheelchair and a scooter. RESULTS: A constant comparative inductive method of analysis of the data yielded several themes which are examined within the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health framework of body functions and structure, activity limitations, participation, and contextual factors. Overall, the wheelchair, manual or power, was an enabler of community participation among the participants. However, the wheelchair's use also created problems, such as limiting destinations and creating increased dependence on others. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: A balance scale model was proposed to facilitate an understanding of how the factors affecting community participation interact in this population. This model can assist occupational therapists who prescribe wheelchairs for stroke clients for use in the community.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it