Quality of Life of Wheelchair Rugby Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quality of life (QOL) of persons with disabilities has recently become focus of studies in various academic disciplines There is 250-500 thousands new cases of spinal cord injury annually, with majority being caused by accidents. Spinal cord injury (SCI) makes significant impact on person's lives as only one third of persons with SCI are able to return to jobs they did prior to acquiring SCI and majority of them cannot return to the hobbies or sports. The purpose of this study was to show the effect of sport participation in wheelchair rugby on QOL of persons with spinal cord injury. Twenty male wheelchair rugby players - athletes with tetraplegia, who are engages in regular organized physical activity - wheelchair rugby training and competition (mean age = 32.50, SD = 8.46). Sixteen persons with tetraplegia (all males) who were not actively engaging in sports - not participating in an organized physical activity (mean age = 39.44, SD = 7.44). While results of wheelchair rugby players were higher in all four domains of QOL, the only significant difference was found in domain one focusing on perceived physical health.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".