The impact of environmental enrichment in an acute stroke unit on how and when patients undertake activities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:: To explore the effect of environmental enrichment within an acute stroke unit on how and when patients undertake activities, and the amount of staff assistance provided, compared with a control environment (no enrichment). DESIGN:: This is a substudy of a controlled before-after observational study. SETTING:: The study was conducted in an Australian acute stroke unit. PARTICIPANTS:: The study included stroke patients admitted to (1) control and (2) environmental enrichment period. INTERVENTION:: The control group received standard therapy and nursing care, which was delivered one-on-one in the participants' bedroom or a communal gym. The enriched group received stimulating resources and communal areas for mealtimes, socializing and group activities. Furthermore, participants and families were encouraged to increase patient activity outside therapy hours. MAIN MEASURES:: Behavioral mapping was performed every 10 minutes between 7.30 a.m. and 7.30 p.m. on weekdays and weekends to estimate activity levels. We compared activity levels during specified time periods, nature of activities observed and amount of staff assistance provided during patient activities across both groups. RESULTS:: Higher activity levels in the enriched group ( n = 30, mean age 76.7 ± 12.1) occurred during periods of scheduled communal activity ( P < 0.001), weekday non-scheduled activity ( P = 0.007) and weekends ( P = 0.018) when compared to the control group ( n = 30, mean age 76.0 ± 12.8), but no differences were observed on weekdays after 5 p.m. ( P = 0.324). The enriched group spent more time on upper limb ( P < 0.001), communal socializing ( P < 0.001), listening ( P = 0.007) and iPad activities ( P = 0.002). No difference in total staff assistance during activities was observed ( P = 0.055). CONCLUSION:: Communal activities and environmental resources were important contributors to greater activity within the enriched acute stroke unit.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".