MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906124347 · doi:10.1177/0269215518820087

The impact of environmental enrichment in an acute stroke unit on how and when patients undertake activities

2018· article· en· W2906124347 on OpenAlexaff
Ingrid Rosbergen, Rohan Grimley, Kathryn S. Hayward, Sandra Brauer

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Rehabilitation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilWishlist
KeywordsStroke (engine)Unit (ring theory)Acute strokeMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyPsychologyInternal medicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations44
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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