Examining the association between balance self-efficacy and virtual balance performance in individuals with stroke: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Balance self-efficacy is a strong predictor of fall risk after stroke and is related to performance on balance and walking tests. The use of telerehabilitation for delivering stroke rehabilitation has increased in recent years and there is a need to adapt common clinical assessments to be administered in virtual formats, but the association between balance self-efficacy and virtually administered clinical tests of balance performance has yet to be established. This study examined the association between the Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale and virtually administered Timed Up and Go (TUG), Tandem Stand, and Functional Reach tests (FRT) in individuals with stroke. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of baseline data from two telerehabilitation trials with individuals with stroke. All assessments were administered by trained physical therapists through videoconferencing software. Multivariate regression analyses were used to examine the associations between the ABC scale and TUG test, Tandem Stand test, and FRT, adjusted for age and number of comorbidities. RESULTS: = 0.07) tests. CONCLUSION: We observed associations between the ABC scores and virtual TUG, but not with Tandem Stand or FRT, which may be attributed to the context-specificity of balance self-efficacy. As virtual administration of outcomes assessments becomes part of common practice in stroke rehabilitation, our study supports the use of virtually administered TUG in stroke.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".