Incorporating physical activity into the rehabilitation process after spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well established that physical activity can improve aspects of physical fitness in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Despite reports of declining health and fitness post-discharge from rehabilitation, there is a limited amount of research exploring exercise status or interventions during this period. The purpose of this dissertation was to investigate the integration of structured exercise into the rehabilitation process following SCI, and to optimize exercise prescription in the community setting. Findings from the first study indicate that exercise is well tolerated among individuals with subacute SCI; performance of a peak exercise test on an arm ergometer was feasible for all injury types. At this stage post-injury, interventions should be mindful of the greater risk of orthostatic intolerance in individuals with complete tetraplegia and focus on building task-specific self-efficacy. The second study involved a direct referral and physical activity counselling intervention post-discharge. Adherence rates were excellent among those participants who received the intervention, suggesting that this model of care can facilitate adherence to community exercise after discharge. The final 2 studies took place in the community. Several modes of adapted exercise were compared and findings indicated that while there were no differences in measures of physiological intensity or enjoyment between the different modes, arm-only exercise was perceived as safer than passive hybrid (arm and leg) exercise. Further, the validity of using ratings of perceived exertion to attain prescribed exercise intensity was established. The efficacy of the physical activity guidelines for improving fitness in adults with SCI were evaluated in a community-based randomized controlled trial and the results revealed that the guidelines were effective in improving both aerobic capacity and muscle strength. Taken together, this series of studies describes a model of care that links rehabilitation with community exercise and suggests options for sustained engagement.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".