MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136539749 · doi:10.1080/09638288.2021.1897887

The potential of outdoor contexts within community-based rehabilitation to empower people with disabilities in their rehabilitation

2021· article· en· W3136539749 on OpenAlexaff
Louise Sofia Madsen, Sonya L. Jakubec, Claus Vinther Nielsen, Charlotte Handberg

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationCommunity-based rehabilitationPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationApplied psychologyMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The aim was to examine the potential of outdoor contexts within community-based rehabilitation to empower people with disabilities in their rehabilitation.Materials and methods: Interpretive description was applied as the methodology in a 5-month ethnographic fieldwork study, and guided by social practice theory. In total, 115 people with disabilities were included for participant observation, of which 15 participants were recruited for individual walking interviews.Results: Analysis revealed four overlapping themes. Firstly, “Revisiting the Outdoors” appeared to be an overarching theme, which created a basis for “Building Autonomy” among the participants. The varied outdoor experiences empowered the participants to take a more active role in their rehabilitation. These experiences afforded unique opportunities for “Connecting with Community” and, finally, “Embodied Learning” – that could be transferred to home and to other everyday contexts.Conclusion: Outdoor contexts within community-based rehabilitation appeared to hold strong potential for connecting people with disabilities to communities. Although barriers exist, we argue that revisiting the outdoors supports collective awareness and action with the capacity to influence community attitudes more broadly.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONOutdoor contexts within community-based rehabilitation for people with disabilities capitalise on the features of both indoor and outdoor environments with activities that meet shifting individual priorities and needs.Outdoor contexts within community-based rehabilitation offer people with disabilities empowering experiences that are part of the landscape of everyday life and transfer well to home and other environments.Community-based rehabilitation directly involving outdoor contexts and supported by professional skills provides a crucial bridge from individual rehabilitation to community belonging.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207