Exploring the Multidimensional Participation of Adults Living in the Community in the Chronic Phase following Acquired Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This exploratory study aimed to examine multiple aspects of the participation of adults in the chronic phase following acquired brain injury (ABI), considering different disability levels. Our study included 25 adults ≥6 months after ABI (predominantly stroke), living at home, without severe cognitive decline. Primary measures included the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (subjective participation) and the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory-4 Participation Index (objective participation). The results indicated subjective participation problems in all of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health participation domains. In addition, objective participation was reported as most limited in the areas of leisure and recreational activities, residence, and employment. Both subjective and objective participation profiles varied according to the disability level except for the social and leisure areas, which were found to be similar across all subgroups. However, only partial compatibility was found between the subjective and objective participation aspects. To conclude, our findings indicated that chronic ABI survivors report a variety of subjective and objective participation concerns that varied according to their disability levels. Moreover, the incongruity between the participation aspects suggests that the level of limitation may not necessarily correspond to the importance of a particular participation area. This highlights the need for comprehensive assessments to determine unique individual participation profiles in order to facilitate client-centered interventions supporting the rehabilitation of community-dwelling ABI survivors.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".