Implementation of a sexuality interview guide in stroke rehabilitation: a feasibility study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although people who sustain a stroke can experience sexual difficulties, few address them during rehabilitation. OBJECTIVES: Explore the feasibility of implementing a Sexuality Interview Guide (SIG) in stroke rehabilitation and describe the factors perceived as influencing its implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a mixed research design, the SIG was implemented for four months in a rehabilitation hospital. The frequency with which clinicians addressed sexuality and their level of comfort pre-post implementation was measured. Perceived factors influencing implementation were determined through individual interviews and focus groups with five stroke clients, 15 clinicians and a coordinator. A paired-specimen Wilcoxon test was used to explore differences in pre- post-level of comfort. Qualitative data was analyzed by two independent evaluators using thematic analysis. RESULTS: = 0.001). The factors perceived as influencing implementation were: the acceptability of the SIG, the individual characteristics, the context of the rehabilitation hospital and the implementation process. CONCLUSION: This study showed that the SIG can be used in stroke rehabilitation and that, with sufficient financial and human resources, and training for clinicians, it would be feasible to implement it in usual care.Implications for rehabilitationThe Sexuality Interview Guide (SIG) can be used in stroke rehabilitation and helps clinicians to target stroke clients who want to include sexuality in their rehabilitation.The best time to approach sexuality using the SIG, according to all participants, was in outpatient rehabilitation.For inpatient clients, it was more appropriate to use the SIG as they approach a weekend home trial or rehabilitation discharge.Training for clinicians working in post-stroke sexual rehabilitation, administrative policies and procedures and access to a sexual health specialist for consultation or referral purpose, would be important facilitators in integrating sexuality into clinical practices.
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 | 0.053 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".