MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379508846 · doi:10.1177/1089313x231177158

Adapting Dance to Complex Clinical Contexts: A Methodology Model

2023· article· en· W4379508846 on OpenAlex
Lucie Beaudry, Annie Rochette, Sylvie Fortin

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dance Medicine & Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDiversity and Impact of Dance
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDanceAdaptation (eye)Psychological interventionPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Situational ethicsApplied psychologyContent analysisChecklistMedical educationRehabilitationProcess (computing)Focus groupComputer scienceMedicineSocial psychologyCognitive psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While the content of health-related dance interventions is still relatively undocumented in the literature, the processes of adapting dance to specific situations are even less so, and rarely seem to be based on theoretical or practical guidelines. Yet the description of these processes could guide the adaptation of other interventions. PURPOSE: This study aimed to document the process of adapting a dance intervention in a complex clinical setting, in order to propose a methodology that could inspire the development of other interventions in specific clinical contexts. METHODS: The adaptation methodology described in this article is part of an embedded single-case study, where the case unit was the adaptation process of a dance group intervention and the subunits of analysis were the intervention's clinical and theoretical premises, content, and pedagogy. Participants were rehabilitation therapists (n=21), patients (n=6), relatives (n=4), and rehabilitation assistants (n=4). Data were collected through various techniques (focus groups, situational observation, pilot dance sessions, interviews, critical incidents, research journals, template for intervention description and replication/TIDieR checklist, and video recordings) to allow an iterative adaptation process. Data were analyzed using inductive qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Adaptations were made prior to and throughout the intervention, taking into account relevant scientific and disciplinary knowledge, as well as the different actors' implicit and explicit experiences. The intervention pedagogy focused on adapting the dance content to meet the participants' needs while inviting them to self-adapt this content. The resulting methodology model includes four stages: preliminary design, validation with rehabilitation therapists, specific tailoring, and ongoing tailoring. Conclusion: Optimizing the adaptation of dance and ensuring its complementarity within a complex clinical context requires collaboration with the different disciplinary clinicians in order to offer synergistic coherence and ensure dance's contribution to therapeutic objectives.

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.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score0.794

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.518
GPT teacher head0.548
Teacher spread0.030 · 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