Changes in Autonomy and Participation in Seniors After Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this pilot study was to assess the levels of autonomy and participation in community-dwelling older adults who have suffered a stroke. Eighteen participants were recruited from various stroke groups in Toronto, Ontario. Demographic information was collected and the Folstein Mini-Mental Status Exam (MMSE) was administered as a screening tool. The Functional Autonomy Measurement Scale (SMAF), the CES-D depression scale and the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA) were administered. The IPA was readministered approximately 3 months later, in order to examine if scores had changed over time. No participants showed any indication of significant cognitive impairment as measured by the MMSE. The mean for the CES-D total scores was 7.68 with a standard deviation of 6.8. This is significantly lower than a score of 16, which indicates depression. The mean for the initial total SMAF scores for the sample was 14.37 with a standard deviation of 10.73. This indicates minimal functional impairment. The total mean IPA scores decreased from time 1 to time 2 with a statistically significant decrease in the family role subscale of the IPA. Items on this subscale were concerned with household duties. Implications are discussed. Further research could investigate which resources provided within the client's environment and from health care services contribute to greater autonomy and participation in daily activities. Through understanding the changes in autonomy and participation that older adults experience after a stroke, health care providers can ensure that their goal of enabling full participation, self-determination and independence is achieved.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".