Community-based exercise goals of persons with spinal cord injury: Interpreted using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify goals for exercising among community-dwelling persons with spinal cord injury (PwSCI). DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive study. SETTING: Community-based exercise facility for persons with a disability. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-five PwSCI identified their exercise goals prior to participation in a community-based exercise intervention. INTERVENTIONS: None. OUTCOME MEASURES: A modified version of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure was used to ask about exercise goals. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) was used to code the goals for themes. RESULTS: The participants were predominantly male (76%) and Black (56%) with thoracic-level injury (51%) and a mean age of 39.44 (standard deviation [SD] 13.62). A total of 231 goals (mean 4.2 goals per participant; SD 1.25) were identified. Participants rated their performance and satisfaction with their goals as 4.256 (SD 1.55) and 3.57 (SD 1.67), respectively. Participants most frequently reported goals related to endurance, muscle strengthening, weight loss, activities of daily living, transferring, and home and community mobility. The most commonly reported goals fell into five ICF domains: Functions of Cardiovascular, Hematological, Immunological, and Respiratory Systems; Neuromusculoskeletal and Movement-Related Functions; Structures Related to Movement; Mobility; and Self-Care. CONCLUSION: PwSCI have goals they would like to achieve through participation in exercise. The goals are multifaceted and encompass improving health and fitness as well as improving performance in everyday activities such as transferring and mobility. Identifying themes of goals for PwSCI to achieve through exercise is an important step in developing programs and interventions needed to support PwSCI living in the community.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".