Carer-supported home-based exercises designed to target physical activity levels and functional mobility after stroke: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To explore the literature on carer-supported home-based exercise programs for people after stroke, as a form of physical activity. The review focus was to examine the training carers receive, the content of programs, and investigate the physical activity levels and functional mobility of people after stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A scoping review was undertaken, guided by Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. The concept of home-based carer-supported exercise, in people after stroke, was searched across five databases. Outcomes of interest were physical activity levels and functional mobility. RESULTS: We screened 2285 references and included 10 studies: one systematic review, five randomised controlled trials, one trial with non-equivalent control, and four uncontrolled studies. Carer training ranged from one to twelve sessions. Exercise interventions commonly including walking, other whole body functional exercises and balance activities. In eight studies interventions were in addition to standard care. Five studies reported significant between-group differences for functional mobility, favouring the intervention. One study reported physical activity levels. CONCLUSION: There was large variation in the volume and content of training provided to carers. Physical activity levels were infrequently objectively reported. Future studies should include greater details on their protocols to allow for replication and implementation into clinical practice.
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 | 0.007 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".