MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296325459 · doi:10.1002/pmrj.12900

Effect of the <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 pandemic on individuals with spinal cord injury: Mental health and use of telehealth

2022· article· en· W4296325459 on OpenAlexaffabout
Adam Mesa, Mark Grasdal, Sarah Leong, Nikolaus A. Dean, Arshdeep Marwaha, Amanda Lee, Michael Berger, Andrea Bundon, Andrei V. Krassioukov

Bibliographic record

VenuePM&R · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreCanadian Physiotherapy AssociationVancouver Coastal HealthInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelehealthMedicinePandemicAnxietyPatient Health QuestionnaireMental healthDepression (economics)TelemedicinePopulationSpinal cord injuryPsychiatryHealth careCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Limited access to health care services and the self-isolation measures due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have had additional unintended negative effects, affecting the health of individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). OBJECTIVES: To examine the perceived influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on individuals with SCI. First, this study looked to understand how the pandemic affected the use and perception of telehealth services for these individuals. Second, it investigated the effect of COVID-19 on mental health. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey. SETTING: Individuals with SCI living in the community in British Columbia, Canada. PATIENTS: This survey was offered to individuals with SCI and had 71 respondents, with 34% living in a rural setting and 66% in an urban setting. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Telehealth utility, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 (GAD-7), Fear of COVID-19 scale (FCV-19S), and Perceived Vulnerability to Disease (PVD). RESULTS: Telehealth use in the SCI population has increased from 9.9% to 25.4% over the pandemic, with rates of telehealth use in urban centers nearing those of rural participants. Thirty-one percent of respondents had probable depression and 7.0% had probable generalized anxiety disorder as measured by a score of ≥10 on the PHQ-9 and GAD-7, respectively. The mean scores on FCV-19S and PVD were 17.0 (6.6 SD) and 4.29 (1.02 SD), respectively. CONCLUSION: Telehealth use during COVID-19 has more than doubled. It is generally well regarded by respondents, although only a fourth of the SCI population has reported its use. With this in mind, it is important to understand the barriers to further adoption. In addition, higher rates of probable depression were seen than those estimated by pre-pandemic studies in other countries.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePM&RSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207