Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div><p>Community ambulation is frequently limited for people with stroke. It is, however, considered important to people with stroke. The objectives were to identify factors associated with self-reported community ambulation in Canadians aged 45+ with stroke and to identify factors associated with community ambulation specific to Canadian males and to Canadian females with stroke. Data were utilized from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging Tracking Cohort. Multivariate logistic regression models were developed for community ambulation. Mean age was 68 (SE 0.5) years (45% female). In the final community ambulation model (n = 855), factors associated with being less likely to ‘walk outdoors sometimes or often’ included difficulty or being unable to walk 2–3 blocks (decreased endurance) vs. no difficulty. Being more likely to walk outdoors was associated with ‘better weather’ months and being 55–64 years of age vs 75–85. Differences were noted between the models of only males and only females. Decreased walking endurance is associated with a decreased likelihood of walking in the community—a factor that can be addressed by rehabilitation professionals and in community based programs.</p></div>
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.827 | 0.068 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".