MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989086234

Activity and participation among people with Late Effects of Polio admitted to comprehensive rehabilitation

2024· article· en· W6989086234 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLund University Publications (Lund University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationPoliomyelitisActivities of daily livingFocus groupInternational Classification of Functioning, Disability and HealthPhysical activityOccupational therapyMEDLINEPublic health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Late effects of polio (LEoP), a chronic progressive neuromuscular condition that affects people who have had polio earlier in life. LEoP manifests with new symptoms such as muscle weakness, fatigue, and pain, and can also have consequences for an individual’s level of activity and participation. People with LEoP can benefit from comprehensive rehabilitation, with focus on enabling activity and participation, yet the understanding of the benefits of comprehensive rehabilitation remains limited. During comprehensive rehabilitation, outcome measures are often chosen based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF), including measures of activity and participation. Common measures in these ares are the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) and the Reintegration to Normal Living Index (RNL-I). Still, very few studies have focused on activity and participation in people with LEoP.The overall aim of this licentiate thesis was to increase knowledge about activity and participation among people with LEoP who were admitted to and received comprehensive rehabilitation. That is, how activity and participation can be assessed and evaluated in relation to a comprehensive rehabilitation period, and how people with LEoP change their activity and participation after a comprehensive rehabilitation period.Two quantitative studies were conducted using data from 102 participants with LEoP, collected retrospectively from a clinical database. The participants had been admitted to comprehensive rehabilitation between 2004-2015.Study I, a cross-sectional study, aimed to explore the association between self-perceived performance (COPM performance), satisfaction (COPM satisfaction) in daily activities, and self-reported participation (RNL-I) among people with LEoP on admission to comprehensive rehabilitation. The data were analyzed with linear regression. The analysis was conducted in two steps, as an explorative analysis emerged during the analysis process.In study II, the methodology involved a pre-post retrospective analysis of 102 LEoP participants, assessing changes in COPM performance and COPM satisfaction, using the COPM on admission and at discharge for people admitted to comprehensive rehabilitation. The analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics and a paired sample t-test. Results showed that both COPM performance and COPM satisfaction were significantly associated with self-reported participation (RNL-I). Specifically, COPM performance in the subgroup COPM self-care correlated with RNL-I Daily Functioning. COPM satisfaction in the subgroup COPM leisure correlated with RNL-I Perception of Self. Results also indicated significant increases in mean COPM performance and mean COPM satisfaction scores from admission to discharge. However, a notable proportion of participants showed no change or even lower ratings at discharge, indicating a need for longer follow-ups. In conclusion, COPM and RNL-I partly measure similar aspects of activity and participation, and both assessments are vital in comprehensive rehabilitation. Comprehensive rehabilitation can enhance self-rated performance and satisfaction with performance among people with LEoP. Additional assessments covering diverse activity and participation aspects may be necessary. To measure change in activity and participation, there is a need for longer follow-ups studies to capture the change. Such insights are crucial not only for occupational therapists but also for other rehabilitation professionals working with people with LEoP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLund University Publications (Lund University)Same topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207