MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145993182 · doi:10.1177/000841740907600204

The Psychosocial Effects of Exercise and Relaxation Classes for Persons Surviving a Stroke

2009· article· en· W2145993182 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gail Carin-Levy, Marilyn Kendall, Archie Young, Gillian Mead

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialStroke (engine)Physical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyRelaxation (psychology)PsychologyMedicineGerontologyClinical psychologyPsychotherapistSocial psychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This study was set up to explore unexpected findings emergent from a randomized controlled trial of exercise versus relaxation post-stroke. PURPOSE: Stroke survivors' experiences of taking part in exercise and relaxation classes were explored. METHODS: In-depth, semi-structured interviews carried out with 14 community-dwelling stroke survivors in Edinburgh. The informants previously participated in a randomized exploratory trial of exercise versus relaxation. FINDINGS: The classes motivated participants to take part in other purposeful activities, to continue to practice what they had learned, and/or to attend another class in the community. Class participation also led to an improvement of self-perceived quality of life, specifically, improved confidence, physical ability, psychosocial functioning, and a sense of empowerment. IMPLICATIONS: Taking part in either exercise or relaxation classes after stroke can contribute to improved self-perceived quality of life, improved psychosocial functioning, and improved motivation to take an active role in the recovery process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations66
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207