Effects of Dynavision Training as a Preparatory Intervention Status Postcerebrovascular Accident: A Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Objective. This is a case study of a 67-year-old woman, status post right hemispheric ischemic lesion cerebrovascular accident (CVA), and her use of Dynavision training as a preparatory intervention to determine its influence on her performance skills and perceived occupational performance. Method. The participant engaged in 6 weeks of Dynavision intervention, 3 days per week. The participant was evaluated using a broad battery of assessments at pretest and posttest. Outcome measures included the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), and goniometric active range of motion (AROM) measurements for the upper extremity. Standing activity tolerance during engagement in occupations also was assessed. A qualitative interview was employed to ascertain the participant's perceptions of how Dynavision training influenced her performance in activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADL). Results. Improvements in performance skills, perceived occupational performance, and perceived satisfaction with engagement in occupation were noted. The participant demonstrated improved AROM, functional activity tolerance, and greater awareness of the neglected side. Qualitative interviews revealed that the participant's satisfaction and confidence with ADL and IADL tasks improved at the time of posttest. Conclusion. Data suggest positive effects of Dynavision intervention when used with an individual status post-CVA.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".