Enhancing community participation for stroke survivors with cognitive impairment: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial in Taiwan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Stroke can lead to life-long disability and constitutes a huge financial burden on the family and society. Stroke survivors with cognitive impairment often experience considerable challenges in the process of recovery and returning to society. Interventions that effectively help individuals resume essential daily activities and return to active participation in their communities are lacking. This study examines the efficacy of a newly-developed intervention programme, the Optimising Participation after Stroke through Strategy-training (OPASS) programme, for improving community participation among stroke survivors with cognitive impairment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A single-blind, parallel-group randomised controlled trial with allocation concealment and assessor blinding will be implemented to assess the efficacy of the OPASS programme. An expected 210 adults with cognitive impairment following stroke will be randomly assigned to either the experimental intervention (OPASS) group or the attention control group. In addition to their usual rehabilitation, both groups will receive 45 min sessions, twice weekly for a total of 12-15 sessions. The primary outcome is change in participation performance, which will be measured using the participation measure-three domains, four dimensions scale. Additional measures include the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care generic outpatient short forms, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Stroop Test, Trail Making Test and General Self-Efficacy Scale. These scales will be administered at baseline, post-intervention, 3-month follow-up, 6-month follow-up and 12-month follow-up. Their results will be analysed using multiple linear regression models and mixed-effects regression models. Further assessment of feasibility and acceptability of the intervention will be conducted through structured interviews with participants, caregivers and therapists. These interviews will be transcribed and thematically analysed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Taipei Medical University (approval number: N201804055). The findings will be disseminated through presentations at scientific conferences and through publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03792061; pre-results.
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 | 0.029 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.010 |
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".