Understanding the experiences, needs, and strengths of people with incomplete spinal cord injury who can ambulate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To identify the experiences, needs, and strengths of people with incomplete spinal cord injury who can ambulate and to explore and discuss potential supports, services, and programs that would best assist them in the community. In this qualitative descriptive study, interviews were the primary means of data collection. These were supplemented with descriptive standardized measures of function and life satisfaction. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Twenty-four participants were interviewed, their average age was 55 years and 46% were female. We identified three themes: ‘I really couldn’t go there’, described the physical and social barriers experienced by participants, ‘It’d be really nice to let the public know there are people out there like me’ expressed the desire for greater social understanding of incomplete spinal cord injury, and ‘I just don’t quit’, displayed the perseverance that participants demonstrated following their injury. Findings indicate service providers to improve the inclusion of ambulatory individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury in their programs. Suggestions include designing programs (community, healthcare, return to work, peer support), environments using the principles of universal design for people with incomplete spinal cord injury who ambulate, and increasing consideration of their perspectives.Implication for rehabilitation:People with incomplete spinal cord injury who can ambulate live with invisible impairments, which are often not acknowledged by family, friends, health professionals, and people with complete spinal cord injuryThey may feel excluded from activities (organized by spinal cord injury associations) that were originally designed for people with complete spinal cord injuryGreater awareness among health professionals, friends, family, and people with complete spinal cord injury of the needs of people with incomplete spinal cord injury who can ambulate is needed to increase their inclusion. People with incomplete spinal cord injury who can ambulate live with invisible impairments, which are often not acknowledged by family, friends, health professionals, and people with complete spinal cord injury They may feel excluded from activities (organized by spinal cord injury associations) that were originally designed for people with complete spinal cord injury Greater awareness among health professionals, friends, family, and people with complete spinal cord injury of the needs of people with incomplete spinal cord injury who can ambulate is needed to increase their inclusion.
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 | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".