The Bournemouth Questionnaire as an outcome measure in the rehabilitation of a person suffering with mechanical neck and arm pain and concurrent Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease: a case report.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper was to present a report in which the Bournemouth Questionnaire was used as an outcome measure in the treatment and rehabilitation of an individual previously diagnosed with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease and concurrently suffering with mechanical neck and arm pain. DESIGN ARCHITECTURE: This was a retrospective case report. SAMPLE PROFILE: An individual over 18 years of age previously diagnosed with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease and now suffering with mechanical neck and arm pain. The individual is free from other illnesses and the individual is free from contra-indications to chiropractic care and rehabilitation. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures of this case report were based on the Bournemouth Neck Questionnaire. METHOD: The course of treatment involved diversified chiropractic manipulative therapy of involved joints, soft tissue therapy and specific rehabilitative postural exercises. Outcome measures were compared to pretreatment baselines. The Bournemouth Neck Questionnaire was completed at weeks 0, and 6. The length of the study was 6 weeks. Re-evaluation of treatment occurred at similar intervals. RESULTS: The Bournemouth patient raw scores pre-intervention were 6, 3, 2, 7, 2, 4, 2 with a total score of 26/70. Post intervention raw scores were 4, 2, 0, 7, 1, 2, 1 with a total score of 17/70. The percentage change score was 34.6. CONCLUSION: The change in raw scores was not clinically important. The percentage change score is considered indicative of clinically important change. The following two questions for further study are presented. Can the questions relating to depression and mood in the Bournemouth Questionnaire be used as a clinical indicator of adherence to home exercise programs? Can the Bournemouth Questionnaire be used as an appropriate outcome measure of non-specific musculoskeletal pain in individuals suffering from Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease?
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".