Technical quality of online resources for mobility device training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Training is recommended to improve safe and effective use of mobility aids. The internet offers a large amount of information and it can be difficult to identify resources with good quality. This project aimed to create a catalogue of online educational resources for mobility device training. The objective of this study was to identify and assess the quality of existing online educational resources for mobility device training for individuals with physical disabilities and caregivers. METHODS: A Google search was conducted in October 2016 and replicated in January 2018. Resources were included if they were educational, were available in English or French, provided instruction or training in mobility aid use, were free of charge, and were targeted towards mobility device users or their caregivers. Resources were assessed using a modified version of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks for the evaluation of technical quality. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy-one resources were included in the final analysis. Two resources were added by the research team for a total of 273 resources. The average JAMA quality score per mobility device varied between 3 (for crutches) and 5 (for knee scooters) out of 6, and weighted average was 3.6. The two resources added by the research team obtained a JAMA quality score of 6. 58 resources were retained for the catalogue. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the technical quality of online educational resources for mobility device training could be improved. A need for higher quality resources for device users and caregivers was identified.Implications for rehabilitationThe overall technical quality of online educational resources for mobility device training for users and caregivers is low.A Mobility Device Training Catalogue is freely available and summarizes the highest quality online resources found on mobility device training.The Mobility Device Training Catalogue is intended for use by users and caregivers, but it may also provide clinicians with a tool that may be shared with their clients.
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 | 0.012 | 0.098 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".