Adult Scandinavians’ use of powered scooters: user satisfaction, frequency of use, and prediction of daily use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate user satisfaction with characteristics of powered scooters (scooters), frequency of use, and factors predicting daily scooter use. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SAMPLE: Adult scooter users (n = 59) in Denmark and Norway, mean age 74.5 (standard deviation 12.3) years. METHODS: Structured face-to-face interviews. The NOMO 1.0, the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive devices (QUEST 2.0), and a study specific instrument were used to collect data. Descriptive statistics were applied, and regression analyzes were used to investigate predictors for daily scooter use. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) served as a framework for classifying variables and guiding the investigation. RESULTS: Satisfaction with the scooter characteristics was high with most participants being very satisfied or quite satisfied (66.1-91.5%). Most scooters were used daily (36.2%) or several times a week (50.0%). User satisfaction with safety of the scooter [odds ratio (OR) = 11.76, confidence interval (CI) = 1.70-81.28] and reduced balance (OR = 5.63, CI = 0.90-35.39) increased the likelihood of daily use, while reduced function in back and/or legs (OR = .04, CI = 0.00-0.75), tiredness (OR = .06, CI = 0.01-0.51), and increased age (OR = .93, CI = 0.87-1.00) reduced the likelihood of daily use. 52.8% of the variance was explained by these variables. CONCLUSIONS: User satisfaction was high, and most scooters were used frequently. User satisfaction with safety, specific functional limitations and age were predictors for daily scooter use. Implications for Rehabilitation Scooters seem to be a beneficial intervention for people with mobility impairment: user satisfaction and frequency of use are high. Users' subjective feeling of safety should be secured in the service delivery process in order to support safe and frequent scooter use. Training of scooter skills should be considered in the service delivery process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".