MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7077986240

Evaluating Virtual Group Coaching’s Impact on Self-Determination in Spinal Cord Injury

2025· article· en· W7077986240 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Medicine Forum · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClosenessPsychosocialCoachingSpinal cord injuryAutonomyCompetence (human resources)Social supportPsychological intervention
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.340 · 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