Exploring powered wheelchair standing device use in children and adults: a longitudinal case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this case series was to explore the influence of powered wheelchair standing device (PWSD) use on participants': (1) activities and participation; (2) quality of life; and (3) lower extremity passive range of motion (LE PROM). CASE DESCRIPTION: Eight participants enrolled in the case series (five adults and three children). Outcome measures included: the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), the EQ-5D-5L or the EQ-5D-Y, the Patient-Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAC-QOL), LE PROM measurements and PWSD use data automatically collected by each PWSD. Participants were provided with a front wheel-drive PWSD designed for both outdoor and indoor use for up to 12-months of use. OUTCOMES: Four participants completed the 12-month case series. Three participants achieved clinically significant improvements in performance on the COPM. Three of the four participants reporting issues with constipation achieved clinically significant improvements in their total PAC-QOL scores. Almost all participants demonstrated changes in some LE PROM. CONCLUSIONS: Applying the Human Activity Assistive Technology model may help to explain differences in both PWSD use and outcomes amongst the individual participants in this case series. The participants who were most successful in using the PWSD were in environments with sufficient space to use the PWSD to perform everyday activities and had higher frequencies of PWSD use. The outcomes of this case series may assist both researchers and clinicians when implementing future PWSD studies recommending PWSDs to their clients/patients. Implications for rehabilitationA wide variety of factors may influence powered wheelchair standing device (PWSD) use.PWSD use may lead to improvements in activities, participation, quality of life and lower extremity passive range of motion.The participants who were most successful in using the PWSD were in environments that permitted use of the PWSD during the performance of everyday activities.COVID-19 restrictions prohibited in-person sessions with a therapist, which could have assisted participants in better integrating the PWSD in their daily lives.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".