Exploring perceived occupational performance among individuals with Vertigo in Jordan: A cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To explore the self-perceived occupational performance in daily life activities in individuals with vertigo in Jordan. Existing evidence is limited on how vertigo affects performing daily life activities like self-care. Materials and methods: This study utilized a cross-sectional design, and convenient sampling. Thirty individuals with vertigo ( M = 47.6 years, SD = 15.93) agreed to participate in this study, filled-out the study demographic and condition-related questionnaire, and completed the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure via a semi-structured interview with study research personnel. Data analyses consisted of descriptive statistics, analysis of frequencies, and Analysis of Variance. Results and conclusions: Individuals with vertigo reported low to average self-perceived occupational performance ( M = 4.13, SD = 1.64) and satisfaction ( M = 3.46, SD = 1.98). The most challenging area of occupation was self-care (66% of the reported challenging activities), followed by productivity (18%) and leisure (16%). Personal care activities were the most challenging from the self-care area (31%), household management activities from the productivity area (13%), and active recreation activities from the leisure area (7%). In conclusion, individuals with vertigo experience low to average occupational performance and satisfaction in daily life activities. Targeted interventions for individuals with vertigo should increase occupational performance in daily life activities, especially self-care.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".