MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164431443 · doi:10.1097/opx.0000000000001705

Head‐mounted Visual Assistive Technology–related Quality of Life Changes after Telerehabilitation

2021· article· en· W3164431443 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de la Montérégie-CentreCentre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Chaudière-AppalachesUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCentre de réadaptation Lethbridge-Layton-MackayCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationCentre Intégré de Santé et de Services Sociaux des LaurentidesCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux de la Montagne
FundersMitacs
KeywordsTelerehabilitationPsychosocialQuality of life (healthcare)Physical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyTelemedicineOptical head-mounted displayPsychologyMedicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceHealth careNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SIGNIFICANCE: Head-mounted low vision devices have become a viable alternative to enhance residual vision. This study supports the use of a head-mounted display to improve aspects of functional vision and quality of life. Much is still unknown regarding the required frequency, duration, or potential effectiveness of this telerehabilitation training protocol or what characteristics best identify optimal users. PURPOSE: A randomized study explored the effect of telerehabilitation on quality of life and functional vision in individuals with low vision using a head-mounted display. METHODS: We recruited 57 participants (age, 21 to 82 years; mean, 54.5 years) among new prospective eSight Eyewear users, randomized 1:1 into two parallel groups; the experimental group received the telerehabilitation training provided by a low vision therapist, whereas the control group received the self-training standard offered by the device manufacturer and without involvement of a low vision therapist. The primary outcome measures were the impact of telerehabilitation on validated measures of assistive technology-related quality of life: the Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale and the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology scale. Exploratory outcomes were the assessment of self-reported functional vision using the Veterans Affairs Low Vision Visual Functioning Questionnaire-48 and cybersickness associated with head-mounted display use with the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire. RESULTS: Assistive technology-related quality of life was improved when measured by the satisfaction scale but not the psychosocial scale within the first 3 months, independently of training type. Overall, functional vision improvement was observed within the first 2 weeks of device use and maintained during the 6-month study, independently of group type. Cybersickness outcomes were similar between training groups and did not change significantly for 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: eSight Eyewear, either with telerehabilitation or with the manufacturer self-training comparison, improved functional vision and increased users' quality of life within the initial 3 months of device training and practice.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.482 · 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