MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329999793 · doi:10.2215/cjn.11981115

A Qualitative Study to Explore Patient and Staff Perceptions of Intradialytic Exercise

2016· article· en· W2329999793 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephanie Thompson, Marcello Tonelli, Scott Klarenbach, Anita Molzahn

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsMedicineThematic analysisRandomized controlled trialHemodialysisPhysical therapyQualitative researchDialysisNursingFamily medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Randomized, controlled trials show that regular exercise is beneficial for patients on hemodialysis. Intradialytic exercise may have additional benefits, such as amelioration of treatment-related symptoms. However, the factors that influence the implementation of intradialytic exercise are largely unknown. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of patients on hemodialysis who had participated in a pilot randomized, controlled trial on intradialytic exercise and dialysis staff that worked in the unit during the trial. The trial took place from July to December of 2014 and enrolled 31 patients. Interviews were conducted from April to December of 2014. Interview coding followed an inductive and broad-based approach. Thematic analysis was used to group codes into common themes, first individually and then, across staff and patient interviews. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients and 11 staff were interviewed. Three themes common to both groups emerged: support, norms (expected practices) within the dialysis unit, and the role of the dialysis nurse. The support of the kinesiologist enhanced patients' confidence and sense of capability and was a key component of implementation. However, the practice of initiating exercise at the start of the shift was a barrier to staff participation. Staff focused on the technical aspects of their role in intradialytic exercise, whereas patients viewed encouragement and assistance with intradialytic exercise as the staff's role. An additional theme of no time (for staff to participate in intradialytic exercise) was influenced by its low priority in their workflow and the demands of the unit. The staff's emphasis on patients setting up their own equipment and enhanced social interaction among participants were additional themes that conveyed the unintended consequences of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The kinesiologist-patient interactions and staff readiness for intradialytic exercise were important factors in the implementation of intradialytic exercise. Understanding how unit workflow and the personal values of staff can influence implementation may improve the design of intradialytic exercise interventions.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations51
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207