Incorporating a Cognitive Strategy Approach into an Outpatient Stroke Physiotherapy Programme: Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance (CO-OP) has demonstrated an effect on skill performance, compared with the usual outpatient rehabilitation, in people living with stroke when implemented by occupational therapists. This study explored refining CO-OP for delivery by both occupational therapists and physiotherapists. Client Description: Two cases were recruited and treated using the CO-OP approach, which augments task-specific training with cognitive strategies and guided discovery. Intervention: Case 1 was a 79-year-old woman, 31 days after parietal stroke, and Case 2 was a 45-year-old man, 62 days after bilateral brain stem stroke. Case 1 withdrew from the study for medical reasons. Outcome measures applied were the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS), the Self-Efficacy Gauge, the Berg Balance Scale, the Box and Block Test, and the 2-minute walk test. Measures and Outcomes: After 10 sessions, Case 2 made gains in most measures, including a 22-point gain in the SIS mobility domain. Implications: The therapists reported that the combined delivery required additional communication with the patients but was feasible. Case 2 reported physical and mobility gains larger than the mean changes seen in past CO-OP research. Although these results cannot be generalized, findings suggest that the inter-professional application of CO-OP warrants further investigation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".