MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098919406 · doi:10.2522/ptj.20110130

Clinical Decision Making in Exercise Prescription for Fall Prevention

2012· article· en· W2098919406 on OpenAlexaff
Romi Haas, Stephen Maloney, Eva Pausenberger, Jennifer L. Keating, Jane Sims, Elizabeth Molloy, Brian Jolly, Prue Morgan, Terry Haines

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminologyExercise prescriptionMedical prescriptionFall preventionMedicinePhysical therapyPsychologyHuman factors and ergonomicsApplied psychologyPoison controlNursingMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Physical therapists often prescribe exercises for fall prevention. Understanding the factors influencing the clinical decision-making processes used by expert physical therapists working in specialist fall and balance clinics may assist other therapists in prescribing exercises for fall prevention with greater efficacy. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to describe the factors influencing the clinical decision-making processes used by expert physical therapists to prescribe exercises for fall prevention. DESIGN: This investigation was a qualitative study from a phenomenological perspective. METHODS: Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with 24 expert physical therapists recruited primarily from the Victorian Falls Clinic Coalition. Interviews focused on 3 exercise prescription contexts: face-to-face individual therapy, group exercise programs, and home exercise programs. Interviews elicited information about therapist practices and the therapist, patient, and environmental factors influencing the clinical decision-making processes for the selection of exercise setting, type, dosage (intensity, quantity, rest periods, duration, and frequency), and progression. Strategies for promoting adherence and safety were also discussed. Data were analyzed with a framework approach by 3 investigators. RESULTS: Participants described highly individualized exercise prescription approaches tailored to address key findings from physical assessments. Dissonance between prescribing a program that was theoretically correct on the basis of physiological considerations and prescribing one that a client would adhere to was evident. Safety considerations also were highly influential on the exercise type and setting prescribed. Terminology for describing the intensity of balance exercises was vague relative to terminology for describing the intensity of strength exercises. CONCLUSIONS: Physical therapists with expertise in fall prevention adopted an individualized approach to exercise prescription that was based on physical assessment findings rather than "off-the-shelf" exercise programs commonly used in fall prevention research. Training programs for people who prescribe exercises for older adults at risk of falling should encompass these findings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.382 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations67
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical TherapySame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207