EXPLORING THE PERCEIVED EFFECTIVENESS OF A NOVEL FUNCTIONAL ACTIVITIES PROGRAM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Canadian Stroke Best Practice Guidelines suggest that in order to enhance motor control and restore function in the upper limb after stroke, stroke survivors need to engage in specific functional tasks that are progressive and repetitive. In accordance, our team developed a program aimed at enhancing recovery of the upper limb through task-specific activities, the promotion of bilateral upper limb use, the development of cognitive and perceptual skills, and education. Purpose: To describe the development and survivor-clinician perspectives of an occupationally-based inpatient functional activity program (FAP). Methods: Using a qualitative approach, semi-structured interviews were completed with survivors and clinicians involved in the FAP over a 4-month period of time. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. The data was analyzed using strategies for theme development. Results: Participants included 9 stroke survivors and 5 staff members. Stroke survivors reported the activities used were real-world and perceived the FAP to facilitate social interaction, problem solving, and confidence. Survivors expressed wanting more choice in activity selection, a better match between challenge and current functioning, and also the potential for homework components outside of therapy time. Conclusions: The FAP is an evidence-based program that could be successfully implemented in an inpatient stroke rehabilitation setting and the objectives are achievable. Importantly, survivors and staff reported positively about the content and importance of using real-world activities. Future research into the efficacy of this program is warranted.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".