MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4292929008 · doi:10.2196/40548

A Tailored Occupational Therapist–Led Vocational Intervention for People With Stroke: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

2022· article· en· W4292929008 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sophie O’Keefe, Kate Radford, Amanda Farrin, Jodi Oakman, Serena Alves-Stein, Geoffrey Cloud, Jacinta Douglas, Mandy Stanley, Natasha A. Lannin

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchAustralian Government
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Protocol (science)Vocational educationStroke (engine)MedicinePhysical therapyPsychologyMedical educationNursingAlternative medicineEngineeringPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Resuming work after stroke is a common goal of working-age adults, yet there are few vocational rehabilitation programs designed to address the unique challenges faced following stroke. The Work intervention was developed to address these gaps. OBJECTIVE: This paper presents a protocol that outlines the steps that will be undertaken to pilot both the intervention and trial processes for the Work trial. METHODS: The Work trial is a 2-arm, prospective, randomized, blinded-assessor study with intention-to-treat analysis. A total of 54 adults of working age who have experienced a stroke <4 months prior will be randomized 1:1 to either (1) an experimental group who will receive a 12-week early vocational intervention (Work intervention) plus usual clinical rehabilitation or (2) a control group who will receive only their usual clinical rehabilitation. RESULTS: Outcomes include study and intervention feasibility and intervention benefit. In addition to evaluating the feasibility of delivering vocational intervention early after stroke, benefit will be assessed by measuring rates of vocational participation and quality-of-life improvements at the 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Process evaluation using data collected during the study, as well as postintervention individual interviews with participants and surveys with trial therapists, will complement quantitative data. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the trial will provide details on the feasibility of delivering the Work intervention embedded within the clinical rehabilitation context and inform future trial processes. Pilot data will enable a future definitive trial to determine the clinical effectiveness of vocational rehabilitation when delivered in the early subacute phase of stroke recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12619001164189; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=378112&isReview=true. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/40548.

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)0.050
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0500.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.006
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0080.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0800.013

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.531
Teacher spread0.386 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→