The experience of living with stroke: a qualitative meta-synthesis
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
OBJECTIVE: The effects of stroke on stroke survivors are profound and cannot adequately be understood from a single approach or point of view. Use of qualitative study, in addition to quantitative research, provides a comprehensive picture of the consequences of stroke grounded in the experience of stroke survivors. The purpose of the present study was to examine the contribution of the published qualitative literature to our understanding of the experience of living with stroke. DESIGN: Qualitative meta-synthesis. METHOD: A literature search was conducted to identify qualitative studies focused on the experience of living with stroke. Themes and supporting interpretations from each study were compiled and reviewed independently by 2 research assistants in order to identify recurring themes and facilitate interpretation across studies. RESULTS: From 9 qualitative studies, 5 inter-related themes were identified as follows: (i) Change, Transition and Transformation, (ii) Loss, (iii) Uncertainty, (iv) Social Isolation, (v) Adaptation and Reconciliation. CONCLUSION: The present synthesis suggests the sudden, overwhelming transformation of stroke forms a background for loss, uncertainty and social isolation. However, stroke survivors may move forward through adaptation towards recovery. Meta-synthesis of qualitative research is needed to promote the inclusion of what we know about patient preferences and values in evidence-based practice.
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 | 0.003 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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