Maximizing gait and balance: behaviors and decision-making processes of persons with multiple sclerosis and physical therapists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the behavioral decisions used by persons with multiple sclerosis (MS) and physical therapists to maximize gait and balance following outpatient physical therapy. METHODS: A multi-method case series with seven matched pairs (persons with MS-physical therapists). Quota sampling maximized variability among persons with MS (disease steps score range 3-6). Three of the four physical therapists were MS or neurology certified. Persons with MS completed a phone survey, follow-up interview, and standardized questionnaires. Physical therapists completed an interview. Data were collected 2-8 weeks following discharge. Content and constant comparison analyses were used for thematic development and triangulation. RESULTS: Core themes arose exemplifying the decision-making processes and actions of persons with MS (challenging self by pushing but respecting limits) and physical therapists (finding the right fit). One overarching theme, keeping their lived world large, or participation in valued life roles, emerged integrating both perspectives driving decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Participants have a shared goal of maximizing gait and balance so persons with MS can participate in valued life roles. Understanding the differences in the behavioral decisions and optimizing skill sets in shared decision-making and self-management may enhance the therapeutic partnership and engagement in gait- and balance-enhancing behaviors. Implications for Rehabilitation Persons with MS and physical therapists have a shared goal of maximizing gait and balance so persons with MS can participate in valued activities and life roles, or more poetically, keep their lived world large. Knowledge that persons with MS aim to challenge themselves by pushing but respecting limits can provide physical therapists with greater insight in helping persons with MS resolve uncertainty, set meaningful goals, and build the routines and resilience needed for engagement in gait- and balance-enhancing behaviors. Enriching skill sets in shared decision-making, behavior change and self-management may optimize the physical therapist toolbox.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".