Long-term effect in ADL after an interdisciplinary rehabilitation programme for WAD patients: a mixed-method study for deeper understanding of participants’ programme experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate long-term effects in self-perceived occupational performance and satisfaction in Activities of Daily Living (ADL) for patients with Whiplash Associated Disorders (WAD) with chronic pain in an interdisciplinary rehabilitation programme, and investigate patients' opinions of programme effects. METHOD: A mixed-method with sequential explanatory design was used. Fifty-three patients with WAD were followed-up 12 months after discharge. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure was used to evaluate the change in ADL and the Multidimensional Pain Inventory for psychosocial functioning. Telephone interviews, based on five structured questions about the perceived impact of the rehabilitation programme, were made. RESULTS: The 12-month follow-up showed significant ADL improvement (p < 0.001). There was less interference in daily activities due to pain (p < 0.01), and life control increased. More people were back to work. Interviews revealed the programme's environment as strengthening and safe, and participants felt they were met with respect. Key success factors were to be treated with respect to being part of the social context and to obtain new knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: The interdisciplinary rehabilitation programme had initiated a process of change towards a more active life for the participants. They had found a new way of managing their lives. Despite the absence of pain reduction, they managed ADL in a better way, had more life control and returned to work to a higher degree. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: Chronic pain after WAD effects the entire life for many people. Long-term effects on activities of daily living, life control and work ability have shown positive results after an interdisciplinary rehabilitation programme based on behavioural and cognitive principles. The key success factors were to be treated with respect to being a part of a social context and to obtain new knowledge.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".