MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606595552 · doi:10.1111/jep.12742

Conceptualizing movement by expert Bobath instructors in neurological rehabilitation

2017· article· en· W2606595552 on OpenAlexaff
Julie Vaughan‐Graham, Kara K. Patterson, Karl Zabjek, Cheryl Cott

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurorehabilitationConceptualizationMovement (music)PsychologyRehabilitationPerspective (graphical)Physical medicine and rehabilitationApplied psychologyMedical educationCognitive psychologyMedicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES: Movement, a core aspect of physiotherapy practice, and integral to the clinical reasoning process has undergone limited theoretical development. Instead, research has focused on intervention effectiveness embedded within the positivist paradigm. The purpose of this study was to explore how expert neurorehabilitation therapists conceptualize movement as part of their clinical reasoning. METHOD: A qualitative interpretive descriptive approach consisting of stimulated recall using video-recorded treatment sessions and in-depth interviews was used. Theoretical sampling was used to recruit members of the International Bobath Instructors Training Association (IBITA) who are recognized experts in neurorehabilitation. Interview transcripts were transcribed verbatim. Data analysis was progressive, iterative, and inductive. RESULTS: Twenty-two IBITA instructors from 7 different countries volunteered to participate. They ranged in clinical experience from 12 to 40 years and instructor experience from 1 to 35 years. The conceptualization of movement by the IBITA instructors involves the following elements: (1) movement comprises the whole person and the whole body, not just individual body segments; (2) active alignment of body segments is integral to movement performance; and (3) efficient movement requires the relative integration of postural control/stability and selective movement/mobility. CONCLUSIONS: The IBITA instructors conceptualize movement from a person-centred perspective. The integration of postural control and selective movement, with alignment and variability as key components, forms the foundation of their understanding of movement. Further investigation into the role of postural control in movement recovery post central nervous system lesion is required. Likewise, the dimensions of movement critical to the conceptualization of movement are not well understood from the perspective of the physiotherapist or persons with neurological impairments.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.109
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.390 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Evaluation in Clinical PracticeSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207