MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2535443648 · doi:10.1080/09638288.2016.1239764

Reducing sedentary behaviour after stroke: perspectives of ambulatory individuals with stroke

2016· article· en· W2535443648 on OpenAlexaff
Victor E. Ezeugwu, Neera Garga, Patricia J. Manns

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Alberta
FundersLIFE programme
KeywordsSittingThematic analysisStroke (engine)PsychologyRehabilitationQualitative researchAffect (linguistics)Physical therapySedentary lifestyleSedentary behaviorGerontologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePhysical activity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Understanding the determinants of sedentary behaviour (sitting or lying with low energy expenditure) in stroke survivors can enhance the development of successful behaviour change strategies. This qualitative study explored the perceptions of stroke survivors about sedentary behaviour and ways in which it can be changed. METHODS: An interpretative qualitative inquiry was used with thematic analysis of interview data. Interviews were conducted using a semi-structured guide with 13 stroke survivors. Interview transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Self-reported sedentary time was assessed during interviews. RESULTS: Four main themes emerged from the data: meaning of sedentary behaviour, reasons for sedentary behaviour, barriers and facilitators to reducing sedentary behaviour, and strategies to sit less and move more. Only 6 participants knew about sedentary behaviour, and 2 were aware of the associated health risks. Participants encountered barriers in their daily lives that affect engagement in activity including motor impairments, fatigue, cognitive problems, and lack of motivation. Using wearable technologies and action planning to reduce sedentary behaviour hold promise as behaviour change strategies. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited awareness of health risks of sedentary behaviour among stroke survivors. Strategies involving self-monitoring and movement throughout the day are potential ways to reduce sedentary behaviour. Implications for Rehabilitation Reducing sedentary behaviour in ambulatory stroke survivors is dependent on a number of modifiable determinants. Planning regular interruptions in sedentary time, such as standing or walking frequently throughout waking hours, during television commercial breaks or while using the phone are some potential strategies for reducing sedentary behaviour in stroke survivors. Availability of social and professional support and self-monitoring using wearable technologies that provide real-time feedback might result in increased motivation to sit less and move more. Using alarms and devices that provide cues to action by reminding participants to sit less and move more were perceived as important.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations62
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207