Pilot of a community-based interprofessional “student-infused” pulmonary rehabilitation program in Saint John, New Brunswick
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: With the increasing prevalence of chronic pulmonary conditions in New Brunswick and Canada it is necessary to consider innovative interventions to improve access to rehabilitation and supportive care for affected clients. In Fall 2018 we piloted a pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) program for persons with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to demonstrate a novel approach of bridging interprofessional education of students in health care fields with provision of care in a community setting. Methods: An 8-week PR program was implemented and evaluated using a quasi-experimental design with pre- and post-testing to measure the effects of the program's exercise and educational interventions on persons with COPD. Participants were assessed using the 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and a custom questionnaire that rated the participants' activities of daily living and the PR program. Results: Seven participants completed our PR program. Following the intervention, participants' self-reported health demonstrated a statistically significant improvement. Even though changes on the 6MWT and SGRQ were not shown to be statistically significant, there was evidence of clinically meaningful improvements in those measures. On average, participants walked 25 m further postintervention and showed clinically meaningful improvements on the SGRQ. Conclusions: This pilot project demonstrated that a community-based PR program with active involvement of students from multiple health care programs can have positive outcomes for clients with COPD. It also illustrated how educational programs can provide an innovative means for increasing access to rehabilitation and supportive care for clients 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".