The effect of occupation-based postural stability training on postural stability and occupational performance in visually impaired individuals: A randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The purpose of this research was to examine the effect of occupation-based postural stability training on occupational performance and postural stability in visually impaired individuals. Method The research was designed as pre-test/post-test, with two groups (study group and control group). A total of 34 individuals with visual impairment were randomly assigned to the two groups. Participants were evaluated using a sociodemographic information form, the Biodex Balance System for postural stability, the Canadian Occupational Performance Measurement for assessing performance and satisfaction of occupations and the semi-structured interview form. The control group received only postural stability training with the Biodex Balance System and the study group received individualised occupation-based postural stability training with the Biodex Balance System BBS during a 12-week intervention (24 sessions). Results A statistically significant difference was found between the postural stability values of the study group and the control group when looking at pre and post-training measurements ( p < 0.05). It was observed that there was an improvement in the postural stability of the participants in both groups. There was a statistically significant increase in the occupational performance and satisfaction of participants in the study group ( p < 0.01). Conclusion Adding person-centred, meaningful and purposeful occupations into rehabilitation programmes that use technological devices increases functionality in activities of daily living.
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 | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".