MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043339982 · doi:10.3109/09638288.2010.533812

Health of people with spinal cord injury in Singapore: implications for rehabilitation planning and implementation

2010· article· en· W2043339982 on OpenAlexaff
Sock Hui Joy Teo, Sharon Sew, Catherine L. Backman, Susan Forwell, Wing Kuen Lee, Poh Leng Chan, Elizabeth Dean

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationSpinal cord injuryPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyMedicineSpinal cordPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This study aimed to provide a broad overview of the health of people with spinal cord injury (SCI) in Singapore, so as to highlight areas of potential need. These areas could then guide future research and rehabilitation programme development. METHODS: Demographic data, injury information and information about SCI-related secondary impairments, chronic conditions and their associated risk factors, medical and hospital utilisation, participation (Craig Handicap Assessment and Reporting Technique) and life satisfaction (Satisfaction with Life Scale) were collected via interviews from people living with traumatic SCI. RESULTS: On average, participants (50 men and 5 women) were aged 48.3 ± 16.54 years and had had their SCIs for 5 years. -75% with tetraplegia. The most prevalent SCI-related secondary impairments were pain, spasms, bladder problems, bowel problems and oedema. Chronic conditions and their associated risk factors were prevalent. Participation and life satisfaction scores were lower than those reported for similar populations cross-culturally. CONCLUSION: The study revealed several health areas that may be affecting the overall health of people with SCI in Singapore. By focusing on community reintegration and health promotion, physiotherapists and other rehabilitation professionals may augment health outcomes and improve the quality of life of this population in Singapore.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.421 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207