MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040874603 · doi:10.1080/09638280802168368

Relation between post-stroke satisfaction with time use, perceived social support and depressive symptoms

2008· article· en· W2040874603 on OpenAlexaff
Susan E. Doble, Cindy Shearer, Julie Lall-Phillips, Stan Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial supportDepression (economics)Depressive symptomsPsychologyGeriatric Depression ScaleStroke (engine)Scale (ratio)Clinical psychologyPsychiatryCognitionSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine if perceived level of social support and number of depressive symptoms differentiates those who are satisfied with their time use post-stroke from those who are dissatisfied. METHOD: Secondary analysis of data of 54 subjects grouped by yes/no responses to 'Are you satisfied with how you spend your time?' Perceived social support and number of depressive symptoms were evaluated using the MOS Social Support Scale and Geriatric Depression Scale respectively. RESULTS: Time use satisfaction was high (64.8%). Dissatisfied subjects reported lower affectionate support and fewer positive social interactions (t < -2.70, p < 0.009) as well as higher levels of depression (t = 2.06, p = 0.05). Dissatisfied subjects were more likely to endorse only three Geriatric Depression Scale items (i.e., 'dropped activities', 'often bored', and 'often felt helpless') (chi2(1) > 7.27, p < 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Persons post-stroke who are dissatisfied with their time use may not be depressed but may benefit from participation in meaningful social occupations.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.342 · 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.

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

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207