A Telerehabilitation Approach to Enhance Quality of Life Through Exercise Among Adults With Paraplegia: Study Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite compelling evidence linking physical activity and quality of life among adults with spinal cord injury (SCI), exercise participation rates are extremely low in this population. Unfortunately, a lack of behavioral exercise interventions, in particular theory-based randomized controlled trials (RCT), exists within the SCI literature. A pilot RCT is needed to first examine the feasibility to conduct such interventions and determine the appropriate effect size to inform future full-scale interventions. OBJECTIVE: The overall goal of this pilot RCT is to test an 8-week innovative, video-based telerehabilitation intervention based on self-determination theory and aimed at enhancing the basic psychological needs, motivation, exercise participation, and quality of life‒related outcomes of adults with paraplegia. The objectives are to (1) determine if individuals in the intervention group have greater increases in their basic psychological needs and autonomous motivation and a decrease in controlled motivation compared to the control group, (2) determine whether the intervention group reports greater increases in exercise participation and quality of life‒related variables (eg, life satisfaction, participation in daily/social activities, depressive symptoms) compared to the control group, and (3) examine if adults with paraplegia who received the intervention report improved scores on psychosocial predictors of exercise (eg, action planning) and well-being (eg, positive affect) compared to the control group. We also aimed to examine the implementation characteristics of the intervention (eg, satisfaction with the technology, counselor's ability to foster the psychological needs). METHODS: Adults with paraplegia (N=24) living in the community will be recruited. All participants will be invited to complete assessments of their psychological needs, motivation, exercise, and quality of life‒related variables at three time points (baseline, 6, and 10 weeks). Following the baseline assessment, participants will be randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. Participants in the intervention group will participate in 8 weekly, 1-hour video-based telerehabilitation sessions with a trained physical activity counselor, while participants in the control group will be asked to continue with their regular routine. RESULTS: We expect higher ratings of the basic psychological needs and autonomous motivation and lower scores for controlled motivation for the intervention group compared to the control group (Objective 1). We also expect that our video-based intervention will have moderate effects on exercise participation, as well as small-to-moderate positive effects on the quality of life‒related variables (Objective 2). Finally, we expect the intervention to have a small positive effect on psychosocial predictors of physical activity and well-being (Objective 3). CONCLUSIONS: We anticipate that the results will show that the intervention is appropriate for adults with paraplegia and feasible to test in a full-scale RCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02833935; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02833935 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6u8U9x2yt).
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 | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.072 | 0.012 |
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".