MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377822940 · doi:10.3389/fresc.2023.1136742

Environmental determinants for participation among stroke survivors in Africa, a scoping review

2023· review· en· W4377822940 on OpenAlexaff
Yohannes Awoke Assefa, Zelalem Dessalegn Demeke, Sara Yirgalem Wolde, Yisak Girma Guadie

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational Classification of Functioning, Disability and HealthGrey literatureSystematic reviewStroke (engine)MEDLINEMedicinePsychologyGerontologyPolitical scienceRehabilitationPhysical therapyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: In this review, we aimed to determine the environmental factors that are influencing the participation of stroke survivors in Africa. Methods: Four electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to August 2021, and identified articles were screened by the two authors of this review based on predetermined criteria. No date restrictions were imposed, and we included any type of paper, including gray literature. We followed the scoping review framework by Arksey and O'Malley, which was later revised by Levac et al. The whole finding is reported using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Results: A total of 584 articles were generated by the systematic search, and one article was added manually. After eliminating the duplicates, the titles and abstracts of 498 articles were screened. From the screening, 51 articles were selected for full article review, of which 13 met the criteria to be included. In total, 13 articles were reviewed and analyzed based on the international classification of functioning, disability, and health (ICF) framework of the environmental determinants. Products and technology; natural environment and human-made changes to environment; and services, systems, and policies were found to be barriers for stroke survivors to participate in their community. Conversely, stroke survivors are getting good support from their immediate family and health professionals. Conclusion: This scoping review sought to identify the environmental barriers and the facilitators that are determining the participation of stroke survivors in Africa. The results of this study can serve as a valuable resource for policymakers, urban planners, health professionals, and other stakeholders involved in disability and rehabilitation. Nonetheless, additional research is necessary to validate the identified facilitators and barriers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0120.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Rehabilitation SciencesSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207