MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916291319 · doi:10.3138/ptc.2017-85.pc

Enhancing Access to Physical Therapy Services for People Experiencing Poverty and Homelessness: The Lighthouse Pilot Project

2019· article· en· W2916291319 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Sarah Oosman, Garnette Weber, Morenike Ogunson, Brenna Bath

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiotherapy Canada · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsCanadian Physiotherapy AssociationUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatchewan Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyMedicineGerontologyPhysical therapyNursingPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Our aim was to reveal client and provider perspectives on the impact of enhancing access to physical therapy services in a primary health care community-based setting. Method: Clients of The Lighthouse Supported Living facility in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, who accessed physical therapy services over a 4-month pilot period and health care providers (physical therapists and a nurse practitioner) provided qualitative data (through interviews and an online discussion board). Client demographics, health condition, perceived function, quality of life, and satisfaction were obtained through chart review and questionnaires. Results: Forty-seven clients ranging in age from 21 to 72 years (mean 47 y) participated in the pilot project. Most presented with a musculoskeletal issue (85.1%). Analysis of the qualitative data gathered from client and provider participants revealed the following four overarching themes: (1) complex health challenges, unmet needs; (2) overcoming access barriers and impact of physical therapy services; (3) respecting and responding to context and environment; and (4) moving forward to enhance access to physical therapy care. Conclusions: Individuals experiencing homelessness and poverty face diverse barriers to accessing physical therapy services, including transportation, cost, wait times, and geographical location. Clients who accessed physical therapy services at The Lighthouse perceived a positive impact on their overall health, function, and wellness.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiotherapy CanadaSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207