Influence of peer-based rehabilitation interventions for improving mobility and participation among adults with mobility disabilities: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The prevalence of mobility disability reaches up to 20.5% among older adults. Mobility is a key factor of participation, thus rehabilitation interventions often aim to improve mobility and participation. Peer-based approaches to intervention delivery have become increasingly common. This study aims to identify peer-based rehabilitation interventions and summarize their influence on mobility and participation among individuals with mobility disabilities.Method: A systematic review was conducted using CINALH, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO. Articles that evaluated peer-based rehabilitation interventions for individuals with a mobility disability and assessed mobility or participation, as defined in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health framework, were included. Study quality was assessed using the Physical Therapy Evidence Database and the Quality Assessment Tool for Before-After Studies With No Control Group.Results: Thirteen peer-based studies were identified. Six peer-led studies evaluated participation and two evaluated mobility. Seven professional-led studies evaluated participation and six evaluated mobility. Randomized controlled trials had fair to high quality. The quality of pre–post studies ranged from poor to good.Conclusion: Peer-based interventions should not be overlooked as a potential intervention strategy, but further research is needed to establish their influence on mobility and participation.Implications for rehabilitationPeers offer a unique model of intervention that could support clinicians in their effort to improve mobility and participation outcomes for individuals with disabilities.There are currently two main models of peer-based interventions in rehabilitation: professional-led (peers assist professionals to facilitate the intervention) and peer-led interventions (peers facilitate the intervention).Both professional-led and peer-led models of intervention could be helpful in facilitating participation and in increasing mobility.
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 | 0.016 | 0.076 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".