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 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 | 0.019 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".