ADL Differences in Individuals with Unilateral Hemispheric Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Literature regarding the ability of individuals who have a cerebrovascular accident (CVA) to perform activities of daily living (ADL) is inconclusive regarding the impact of gender, age or side of the lesion. PURPOSE: To determine if people with a CVA differ in their abilities to perform ADL tasks and actions as affected by their gender, age, and side of the lesion. METHOD: A descriptive comparison of 3878 people with a right or left CVA included in the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) database. RESULTS: People with stroke demonstrated statistically significant gender, age, and side of CVA differences in overall ADL ability. However, the gender and side of CVA differences were not clinically detectable. Increased age was associated with a gradual decline in ADL ability. CONCLUSION: Individuals with a right or left CVA have similar abilities when performing ADL tasks and actions. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: These findings indicate that occupation-based intervention, which focuses on the utilization of intact ADL skills to compensate for ADL skill deficits (vs. the utilization of tests of body function), may be a more efficient and effective means of planning and implementing occupational therapy intervention for individuals with a stroke.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".