Survey of fitness facilities for individuals post-stroke in the Greater Toronto Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In light of the demonstrated importance of fitness programs after stroke, the current study set out to determine the availability and characteristics of fitness programs for individuals after stroke in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). A questionnaire was distributed to 784 fitness programs in the GTA requesting information on the facility, program characteristics, and barriers to and willingness in offering specific programs for individuals post stroke. Of the 213 respondents, 146 (69%) reported that individuals with a chronic disability participated in their activities, 39 (18%) did not allow individuals with disabilities to participate, and 28 (13%) were unaware if individuals with disabilities accessed their facilities. Sixty-two facilities (29%) offered specific fitness programs for individuals with a chronic disability including 26 (12%) that offered exercise programs for people who have had a stroke. The study identified that a small percentage of fitness programs surveyed in GTA have fitness programs for individuals post-stroke. Since the occurrence of stroke is expected to increase as the population ages, the need for community fitness programs for individuals post-stroke will continue to rise. Many facilities expressed interest in offering specific fitness programs for individuals post-stroke; therefore, barriers must be addressed to facilitate the development of these 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".