MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2560001907 · doi:10.2196/resprot.5887

A Multidisciplinary Model to Guide Employment Outcomes Among People Living With Spinal Cord Injuries in South Africa: A Mixed Methods Study Protocol

2016· article· en· W2560001907 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ntsikelelo Pefile, Joyce Mothabeng, Saloshni Naidoo

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultidisciplinary approachRehabilitationDelphi methodGainful employmentPsychological interventionMedicineFocus groupRecreationHealth careProtocol (science)NursingPsychologyPhysical therapyBusinessEconomic growthPolitical scienceJob satisfactionMarketingSocial psychologyEconomicsAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord injury (SCI) often results in complete or partial loss of functioning of the upper and/or lower limbs, leading to the affected individual experiencing difficulties in performing activities of daily living. This results in reduced participation in social, religious, recreational, and economic activities (employment). The South Africa legal framework promotes the employment and assistance of people with disabilities. However, rehabilitation interventions focus mainly on impairments and activity limitations, with few attempts to prepare those with SCI to return to gainful employment. There is therefore a need for a well-coordinated, multidisciplinary rehabilitation initiative that will promote the employment of people living with spinal cord injuries (PLWSCI) in South Africa. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop a multidisciplinary model to guide employment outcomes amongst PLWSCI in South Africa. METHODS: This study will utilize explanatory mixed methods during 3 phases. The first phase will explore the current rehabilitation practices, and the second will establish the factors that influence employment outcomes among PLWSCI. A multidisciplinary team consisting of health care professionals, representatives from the departments of Labour, Education, Social Development, and Health, and nongovernment organizations representing PLWSCI will provide feedback for the model development of phase 3, along with results from the previous 2 phases, using a multistage Delphi technique. RESULTS: It is estimated that the results of phases 1 and 2 will be completed 11 months after data collection commencement (November 2015). Phase 3 results will be finalized 4 months after phases 1 and 2. CONCLUSIONS: Developing a multidisciplinary model to guide the employment outcomes of PLWSCI will ensure a coordinated response to integrate them into a productive life and will assist them to achieve economic self-sufficiency, personal growth, social integration, life satisfaction, and an improved quality of life. This can be achieved by active inclusion of PLWSCI to ensure that their concerns and recommendations are addressed. CLINICALTRIAL: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02582619; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02582619 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6mBgcj6z7).

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)0.061
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0610.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.003

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 head0.304
GPT teacher head0.621
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicSpinal Cord Injury Research→French-language works237,207→