MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W131682193

Neuromusculoskeletal disorders following SARS: a case series.

2011· article· en· W131682193 on OpenAlexaff
Brynne Stainsby, Scott Howitt, Jason Porr

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsCanadian Memorial Chiropractic College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChiropracticMedicineManual therapyPhysical therapyConservative treatmentModalitiesPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRehabilitationConservative managementIntervention (counseling)Presentation (obstetrics)Spinal manipulationLow back painAlternative medicineSurgeryPathologyPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To detail the presentation of three health care workers diagnosed with sudden acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) who later presented to a CMCC teaching clinic with neuromusculoskeletal sequelae and underwent conservative treatments. This case series aims to inform practitioners of the potential pathogenesis of these neuromuscular complaints and describes their treatment in a chiropractic practice. CLINICAL FEATURES: Three patients presented with a variety of neurological, muscular and joint findings. Conservative treatment was aimed at decreasing hypertonic muscles, increasing joint mobility, and improving ability to perform activities of daily living. INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: The conservative treatment approach utilized in these cases involved spinal manipulative therapy, soft tissue therapy, modalities, and rehabilitation. Outcome measures included subjective pain ratings, disability indices, and return to work. CONCLUSION: Three patients previously diagnosed with SARS presented with neuromusculoskeletal complaints and subjectively experienced intermittent relief of pain and improvement in disability status after conservative treatments.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations33
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19French-language works237,207