MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789713391 · doi:10.1177/0269215518763969

Six hours of task-oriented training optimizes walking competency post stroke: a randomized controlled trial in the public health-care system of South Africa

2018· article· en· W2789713391 on OpenAlexaff
Megan Knox, Aimée Stewart, Carol L. Richards

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Rehabilitation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
FundersMedical Research CouncilSouth African Medical Research Council
KeywordsPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialCircuit trainingStroke (engine)Balance (ability)MedicineRepeated measures designBerg Balance ScalePhysical medicine and rehabilitationRehabilitationGaitPsychological interventionAnalysis of varianceSittingSurgeryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a minimal dose intervention of six 1-hour sessions of task-oriented circuit gait training including a caregiver over a 12-week period to persons post stroke in the South African public health sector. DESIGN: Stratified, single blinded, randomized controlled trial with three intervention groups. PARTICIPANTS: Persons post stroke ( n = 144, mean age 50 years, 72 women), mean 9.5 weeks post stroke. INTERVENTIONS: Task group ( n = 51)-accompanied by a caregiver; task-oriented circuit gait training (to improve strength, balance, and task performance while standing and walking). Strength group ( n = 45); strength training of lower extremities while sitting and lying. Control group ( n = 48); one 90-minute educational session on stroke management. MEASURES: The six-minute walk test (6MinWT) was the primary outcome; the secondary outcomes included comfortable and fast gait speeds, Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and Timed Up and Go (TUG). Particpants evaluated at baseline, post intervention (12 weeks), and at follow-up 12 weeks later. Change scores were compared using generalized repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: Task group change scores for all outcomes post intervention and at follow-up were improved compared to the other groups ( P-values between 0.000005 and 0.04). The change scores (mean, 1SD) between baseline and follow-up for the Task, Strength, and Control groups, respectively, were as follows: 6MinWT:119.52 m (81.92), 81.05 m (79.53), and 60.99 m (68.38); comfortable speed 0.35 m/s (0.23), 0.24 m/s (0.22), and 0.19 m/s (0.21); BBS: 9.94 (7.72), 6.93 (6.01), and 5.19 (4.80); and TUG: -14.24 seconds (16.86), -6.49 seconds (9.88), and -5.65 seconds (8.10). CONCLUSION: Results support the efficacy of a minimal dose task-oriented circuit training program with caregiver help to enhance locomotor recovery and walking competency in these persons with stroke.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical RehabilitationSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207