Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective : The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of goal setting on Activities of Daily Living(ADL), occupational performance, and anxiety level in acute stroke patients. Methods : This study was carried out on 10 stroke patients. The study used a pretest/post-test control group design. The intervention was provided to both groups for 30 minutes a session, for 10 sessions, and provided an upper-extremity self-training program. The experimental group set specific goals, while the control group did not. Modified Barthel Index(MBI) and Canadian Occupational Performance Measure(COPM) were used to evaluate the ADL. State-Trait Anxiety Inventory(STAI) was used to evaluate the anxiety level preand post-experiment. Results : Statistically significant differences were found in MBI, COPM-P, and COPM-S(p .05). During each intervention, a statistically significant correlation of anxiety level was not found in the experimental group(rs=.012, p>.05). Conclusion : The results of this study suggest that goal setting, which improves the motivation and participation of acute stroke patients during intervention, has a positive impact on ADL. We also suggest further study reflecting the anxiety factors of the patients during goal setting.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".