User satisfaction, community participation and quality of life among Chinese wheelchair users with spinal cord injury: a preliminary study
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
The purpose of the present study was to investigate the relationships between spinal cord injury (SCI), wheelchair users' satisfaction, perceptions of their community participation and quality of life (QoL).Thirty-one community wheelchair users with SCI were administered the Chinese version of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (C-QUEST), the abbreviated Hong Kong version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life Questionnaire (WHO QoL-BREF (HK)) and selected items of 'Participation Restrictions' and 'Environmental Factors' of the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health (ICF). Only a weak correlation was found between the C-QUEST services sub-scores and one ICF environmental factor, that is, health-related professionals (Spearman's r = 0.453; p < 0.05). The C-QUEST device sub-scores were also weakly correlated with four domain scores of the WHO QoL-BREF (HK) (Spearman's r = 0.412-0.567; p < 0.05). Social relationship, participation in leisure and driving activities had a moderate association with scores of the WHO QoL-BREF (HK) (-0.405 > Spearman's r > -0.583; p < 0.05). It is concluded that community participation (e.g. use of transportation) and human environment (e.g. friends and peers) were more related to QoL, than to users' satisfaction with a wheelchair. Further research with a larger sample is recommended to examine the variables related to SCI and QoL.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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