Occupational Performance Coaching for stroke survivors: A pilot randomized controlled trial protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many stroke survivors report participation challenges. Occupational Performance Coaching for stroke survivors (OPC-Stroke) is designed to assist stroke survivors to develop the ability to plan and manage engagement in occupation. This approach combines emotional support, individualized education, and goal-focused problem solving to promote occupational engagement. PURPOSE: This study will explore the potential efficacy of OPC-Stroke and the feasibility of the research methods for use in a larger trial. METHOD: A pilot randomized controlled trial will be undertaken. Participants will be randomly assigned to receive 10 sessions of OPC-Stroke or usual care. Participation, perceived goal performance, satisfaction and self-efficacy, emotional well-being, and cognition will be measured at three time points. IMPLICATIONS: This research will test the potential usefulness of OPC-Stroke as well as the study methods, and thereby inform the continuing development of OPC-Stroke and further studies to measure its effectiveness.
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 | 0.035 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.058 | 0.008 |
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".