Active Participation of Care Partners in a Physical Activity Intervention Alongside People with Stroke: A Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study investigated the feasibility of a physical activity intervention for people with stroke and their care partners and the role social support plays in physical activity adherence. Method: The study used a single-group, pretest–posttest design with follow-up. Participants were adults with chronic stroke and their care partners. The intervention consisted of 8 weeks of structured, group-based physical activity classes, followed by 19 weeks of self-directed physical activity. Recruitment, adherence, safety, and retention were assessed. Familial social support was assessed before and after the 8-week structured portion and again 19 weeks later. Results: A total of 21 participants (15 people with stroke, 6 care partners), mean age 67.6 (SD 11.6) years, were recruited; 19 (90.5%) completed the 19-week assessment. No adverse events were experienced during the programme. Attendance during the 8-week portion was better than during the 19-week portion (mean difference 0.95; p < 0.001; 95% CI: 0.71, 1.19 visits/wk). No relationship was found between social support and physical activity adherence ( p > 0.05). Conclusions: Involvement of care partners in a physical activity intervention is feasible and safe. Both people with stroke and their care partners may require ongoing support to participate in long-term physical activity. The relationship between social support and physical activity adherence requires further study.
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 | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".