Participant-reported priorities and preferences for developing a home-based physical activity telemonitoring program for persons with tetraplegia: a qualitative analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study design: Focus group. Objectives: The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore perceptions and priorities of persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) for physical activity and to incorporate their feedback to inform future development of a physical activity program delivered via a telemonitoring platform. Setting: New York. Methods: = 7). Two investigators led an audio-recorded focus group using a moderator's guide. Data were analyzed using a six-phase thematic analysis approach. Results: The discussion focused on two major areas, which resulted in multiple derived themes and subthemes. The first theme centered on the daily life of persons with tetraplegia, including changes after SCI, gain of function prioritization, and identification of psychosocial support systems that facilitate community reintegration after injury. The second theme centered on participant perceptions and recommendations for a physical activity program delivered via a telemonitoring platform. Desired design features included variations in schedule, diverse activities, or exercises included in each class, and optional two-way video to enable social interactions with classmates. Conclusions: Participants favorably viewed the concept of a physical activity program delivered via a telemonitoring platform and contributed program design ideas. Although this was a small sample size, challenges to obtaining physical activity expressed by participants were consistent with those identified previously in larger studies of persons with tetraplegia. Therefore, we expect these concepts and their recommendations to be relevant to the greater SCI community.
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 | 0.020 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".