Community integration programs and interventions for people with spinal cord injury: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim The focus of this scoping review was to identify the extent, range, and nature of studies that have been published regarding community integration programs and interventions that support people during the transition home from hospital following spinal cord injury.Methods Four electronic databases and one search engine were searched for articles published between 2010 and 2020. Grey literature and manual searches were also done.Results Of the 16 articles included, 8 were published in peer-reviewed journals. Two of these did not include an evaluation. Study designs included but were not limited to pilot studies (n = 2); mixed methods evaluations (n = 2); single-site randomized controlled trials (n = 3); and, non-randomized single-arm study design (n = 1). The articles were from the United States (n = 12), Canada (n = 2), Australia (n = 1), and the United Kingdom (n = 1).Conclusion The majority of interventions focused on addressing health-related educational needs, followed by community mobility. Goal setting and promoting self-efficacy were identified as important components, and the importance of involvement of people with lived experience was also highlighted. There was a lack of focus on management of relationships, including addressing sexuality needs. This review highlights the need for further empirical evaluation of implemented programs and interventions in this area, particularly in countries other than the USA, to inform service development.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONSuccessful community integration is an important outcome of spinal cord injuries rehabilitation.The majority of published programs focus on health-related educational needs, followed by community mobility.It is recommended that goal setting and promoting self-efficacy are included in programs.It is recommended that people with lived experience of spinal cord injuries are involved in interventions.It is recommended that programs include a focus on management of relationships, including addressing sexuality needs.
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 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".