Evaluating Virtual Group Coaching’s Impact on Self-Determination in Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a lifelong condition that requires effort and adjustment for managing physical, psychological, and social well-being to have the ability to engage in meaningful activities. As people living with SCI have higher rates of isolation and social disconnect, it is important to study group level approaches for addressing mental health. Objectives: To determine the impact of virtual group coaching to enhance occupational performance, satisfaction, self-efficacy and relationship closeness in people living with SCI. Methods: A quasi-experimental single-group pre/post-test design was used. Adults with SCI were recruited through online flyers, social media, newsletters, support groups, clinics, and hospitals. A trained coach led 10 virtual group sessions. Participants volunteered and received compensation. Demographic and injury-related data were collected via Qualtrics at intake. Results: Thirteen participants included diverse demographics. Three outcome measures were used: the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE), and Relationship Closeness Scale (RC). Findings revealed a significant increase in occupational performance, satisfaction, and relationship closeness with peers (p< 0.0001). However, changes in general self-efficacy and relationship closeness with others were not statistically significant. Conclusion: This study underscores the efficacy of virtual group coaching grounded in Self-Determination Theory (SDT), demonstrating its positive impact on autonomy and competence among adults with chronic conditions. The innovative virtual group coaching approach yielded significant improvements in psychosocial outcomes, notably occupational satisfaction and performance, confirming the intervention's effectiveness and potential for broader application. Reference: Cadematori, C., Alpajora, B., Sivori, T., Betz, S., Gerhardt, N., Dunn, W., & Mulcahey, M. J. (2021). Preliminary examination of coaching in context with clients with Spinal Cord Injury. Spinal Cord Series and Cases, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41394-021-00391-9 Hitzig, S. L., Cimino, S. R., Alavinia, M., Bassett-Gunter, R. L., Craven, B. C., & Guilcher, S. J. T. (2021). Examination of the relationships among social networks and loneliness on health and life satisfaction in people with spinal cord injury/dysfunction. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 102(11). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2021.03.030 Passmore, J., & Fillery-Travis, A. (2011). A critical review of executive coaching research: A decade of progress and what’s to come. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 4(2), 70–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/17521882.2011.596484 Potvin, M.-C., West, E. K., Morales, A. N., Sailor, K. S., & Coronado, N. (2022). “I could really use this”: Occupational therapy students’ perceptions of learning to coach. Occupational Therapy International, 2022, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2266326 Synopsis: This study explores the effect of virtual group coaching for self-determination in adults with SCI, offering an evidence-based approach to support autonomy, competence and relatedness for goal achievement and lifelong participation in occupations. Acknowledgments: Marie-Christine Potvin, PhD OTR/L; Catherine Robinson, OTD; Katie McLaughlin, OTD; Janine Rajauski, M, OTR/L
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".