MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990291215 · doi:10.1080/10749357.2019.1690779

“Connecting patients and therapists remotely using technology is feasible and facilitates exercise adherence after stroke”

2019· article· en· W2990291215 on OpenAlexaff
Dawn B. Simpson, Marie‐Louise Bird, Coralie English, Seana Gall, Monique Breslin, Stuart Smith, Matthew Schmidt, Michele L. Callisaya

Bibliographic record

VenueTopics in Stroke Rehabilitation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsGF Strong Rehabilitation Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical therapyStroke (engine)MedicineUsabilityPhysical medicine and rehabilitationIntervention (counseling)TelerehabilitationSystem usability scaleRandomized controlled trialRehabilitationTelemedicineHealth careNursingComputer scienceSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Repetitive task practice after stroke is important to improve function, yet adherence to exercise is low. The aim of this study was to determine whether using the internet, a tablet application, and a chair sensor that connected to a therapist was feasible in monitoring adherence and progressing a functional exercise at home.Methods: Ten participants with stroke completed a 4-week sit-to-stand exercise using the technology at home (ACTRN12616000051448). A therapist remotely monitored exercise adherence, progressed goals, and provided feedback via the app. Measures of feasibility (design, recruitment/withdrawals, adherence, safety, participant satisfaction and estimates of effect on function) were collected.Results: Participants' mean age was 73.6 years [SD 9.9 years]. The system was feasible to deliver and monitor exercise remotely. All participants completed the study performing a mean 125% of prescribed sessions and 104% of prescribed repetitions. Participants rated the system usability (78%), enjoyment (70%) and system benefit (80%) as high. No adverse events were reported. The mean pre- and post-intervention difference in the total short performance physical battery score was 1.4 (95% CI 0.79, 2.00).Conclusions: It was feasible and safe to prescribe and monitor exercises using an app and sensor-based system. A definitive trial will determine whether such technology could facilitate greater exercise participation after stroke.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations38
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTopics in Stroke RehabilitationSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207