Is There a Relationship Between Perceived Activity Performance-Satisfaction Level and Quality of Life in Activities of Daily Living in Adults with Plantar Fasciitis?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: Plantar fasciitis (PF) is a disease that negatively affects quality of life (QOL) and activities of daily living and is the most common cause of heel pain. The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between QOL, perceived activity performance and satisfaction in adults with PF and to determine the activities that have problems in daily living. Materials and Methods: A total of 96 participants, 26 male and 70 female, aged between 18-65 years, with a mean age of 53.88±6.41 years diagnosed with PF completed the study. The Nottingham Health Profile was used to determine the QOL, the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure was used to determine the perceived activity performance and satisfaction level. Results: The findings show the perceived activity performance and satisfaction levels of individuals with PF are negatively related to pain and energy levels, which are sub-dimensions of QOL (p=0.001; p=0.017; p=0.001; p=0.018). Moreover, it has been determined individuals have problems in many activities, such as walking, working, going up and down stairs, housecleaning and sleeping. Conclusion: This study showed the QOL of individuals with PF decreases as activity performance and satisfaction level decrease. Pain is one of the most important factors affecting activity performance, and recurrent and increasing pain with activity may have limited activity participation in individuals with PF. Therefore, pain should be considered as a priority in the evaluation and intervention plans of individuals with PF. Also, activity-based intervention plans should be developed for activities where these individuals have problems in daily living.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".