The Effect of Group-Based Occupational Therapy on Performance and Satisfaction of Stroke Survivors: Pilot Trail, Neuro-Occupational View
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Stroke imposes limitations on performing activities of daily living (ADL) and their level. Different therapeutic approaches are used for improving the level of performance after a stroke. This study was performed with the aim of evaluating the effect of group-based occupational therapy on improving the performance of ADL and satisfaction of its performance in patients with chronic strokes. METHODS: Fourteen chronic stroke patients with the mean age of 52 years participated in the study. The participants were assigned into two groups (control and treatment). The level of performance of ADL, level of stroke disability, and participation were respectively evaluated by Barthel index (BI), modified Rankin scale (MRS), and Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). Six sessions of group therapy tasks were scheduled with an emphasis on three main activities, including mobility exercises, craft, and cooking. RESULTS: The COPM changes in the 'performance' and 'satisfaction' scores in the treatment group and the 'performance' scores in the control group were significant. The MRS scale in the two groups revealed no change in the level of stroke disability. However, the changes in the ADL performance in BI were significant. CONCLUSION: The current study indicated that doing daily, craft, and mobility activities in the groups can affect the 'performance' and 'satisfaction' levels in stroke patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".