MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224300570 · doi:10.1080/09638288.2022.2065539

Factors influencing physical activity among individuals with lower limb amputations: a qualitative study

2022· article· en· W4224300570 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Leanna Lee, Sander L. Hitzig, Amanda L. Mayo, Michael Devlin, Steven Dilkas, Crystal MacKay

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreWest Park Healthcare CentreToronto Rehabilitation InstituteHealth Sciences CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersPhysiotherapy Foundation of Canada
KeywordsQualitative researchPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyPhysical activityPsychologyRehabilitationMedicineGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to explore the barriers and facilitators to physical activity from multiple stakeholder perspectives including individuals with LLA and health professionals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study situated within an interpretive research paradigm was conducted. Semi-structured interviews were held with individuals with LLA recruited from rehabilitation hospitals in a metropolitan city in Canada. Health professionals with experience in amputation care were recruited from across Canada. Data were analysed using codebook thematic analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-three individuals with LLA and eighteen health professionals participated. Six themes were generated which represent the perceived barriers and facilitators to physical activity. Themes including Informal and Formal Supports, Availability of and Access to Community Resources, and Fit and Function of the Prosthesis were perceived by many individuals as facilitators, while acting as a barrier for others depending on an individual's circumstances. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide us with a basis of understanding from which we can begin addressing barriers to physical activity for individuals with LLA, in support of developing patient-centred interventions and physical activity programs for this population. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONIrrespective of amputation etiology, individuals who have lower limb amputation experience several barriers to engaging in physical activity.Many system-level barriers to physical activity exist for people with lower limb amputation, which include lack of availability and access to community resources and specialised prostheses conducive to physical activity participation.A participatory approach engaging both patients and rehabilitation professionals can address the patient-provider discordance with respect to a patient's motivation and attitude towards physical activity participation by creating a supportive environment conducive to behaviour change.The development of future, patient-centered interventions, and physical activity programs for individuals with lower limb amputation must consider fear of falling as a prominent barrier to physical activity and devise potential strategies to address this barrier, by setting realistic and actionable goals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207