Participant-perceived occupational outcomes after two years of yoga for chronic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The study aim was to investigate the perceived impact and experience of long-term involvement in community-based group yoga for people with chronic pain. Methods Eleven participants, who previously completed an 8-week yoga intervention and continued attending yoga at a community pain clinic for 2 years, participated in the study. A mixed-methods approach was employed. Canadian Occupational Performance Measure data were collected during the 8-week yoga study (baseline) and after 2 years of yoga (follow-up). Baseline and follow-up Canadian Occupational Performance Measure data were compared to measure change in perceived occupational performance and satisfaction. Individual qualitative interviews were conducted to explore participants’ perceived impact and experience of long-term yoga involvement. Canadian Occupational Performance Measure data were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and qualitative interviews were analyzed using an inductive approach. Findings Canadian Occupational Performance Measure scores significantly improved between baseline and follow-up. Three main themes emerged from qualitative interviews: (a) Occupational shift from “existing” to “living,” (b) The change process is “progressive,” and (c) Yoga is “a positive thing I do in my life.” Conclusion Long-term involvement in community-based group yoga may improve and sustain occupational performance and satisfaction. Occupational therapists may consider yoga as a tool to promote occupational gains in people with chronic pain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".