Built Environments to Support Rehabilitation for People With Stroke From the Hospital to the Home (B-Sure): Protocol for a Mixed Method Participatory Co-Design Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A global trend is to move rehabilitation closer to people's neighborhoods and homes. Still, little attention has been given to how the built environment outside the hospital setting might impact rehabilitation and recovery for stroke survivors. OBJECTIVE: The overarching objective of this project is to develop conceptual models of built environments that support stroke rehabilitation and recovery outside the hospital setting. Specifically, the project will explore factors and characteristics of the built environment that support people with stroke and their families and identify innovative built environments that can be designed for local health care. The project will examine facilitators and obstacles for implementing built environmental solutions and evaluate the potential benefits, feasibility, and acceptability. METHODS: The project uses a mixed methods design approach with 3 phases. In phase 1, factors and characteristics of the built environment for rehabilitation will be identified. Based on the results from phase 1, phase 2 will involve co-designing prototypes of environments to support the rehabilitation process for people with stroke. Finally, the prototypes will be evaluated in phase 3. Qualitative and quantitative methods will include a literature review, a concept mapping (CM) study, stakeholder interviews, prototype development, and testing. The project will use multidimensional scaling, hierarchical cluster analysis, descriptive statistics for quantitative data, and content analysis for qualitative data. Location analysis will rely on the location-allocation model for network problems, and the rule-based analysis will be based on geographic information systems data. RESULTS: As of the submission of this protocol, ethical approval for the CM study and the interview study has been obtained. Data collection is planned to start in September 2023 and the workshops later in the same year. The scoping review is ongoing from January 2023. The CM study is ongoing and will be finalized in the spring of 2024. We expect to finish the data analysis in the second half of 2024. The project is a 3-year project and will continue until December 2025. CONCLUSIONS: We aim to determine how new environments could better support a person's control over their day, environment, goals, and ultimately control over their recovery and rehabilitation activities. This "taking charge" approach would have the greatest chance of transferring the care closer to the patient's home. By co-designing with multiple stakeholders, we aim to create solutions with the potential for rapid implementation. The project's outcomes may target other people with frail health after a hospital stay or older persons in Sweden and anywhere else. The impact and social benefits include collaboration between important stakeholders to explore how new environments can support the transition to local health care, co-design, and test of new conceptual models of environments that can promote health and well-being for people post stroke. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/52489.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".