A randomized controlled trial of the effects of weights on amplitude and frequency of postural hand tremor in people with Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of weights on postural hand tremor related to self-feeding in subjects with Parkinson's disease (PD). DESIGN: In a repeated-measures design, postural hand tremor was recorded three times in each of three weight conditions in a single session for each subject. The order of all recording conditions was randomized. SETTING: Intervention was applied and measurement was conducted in a university-based motor performance laboratory. SUBJECTS: Fourteen men and two women diagnosed with PD and having hand tremor participated (mean age 67.1 years, mean duration of PD 4.6 years). All were community-dwelling. INTERVENTION: The control condition consisted of holding a built-up spoon (108 g). There were two experimental conditions: holding a weighted spoon (248 g); and holding the built-up spoon while wearing a weighted wrist cuff (470 g). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Three measures of tremor amplitude and two measures of tremor frequency were calculated from recordings of displacement of the spoon obtained from laser displacement sensors. RESULTS: Repeated-measures analyses of variance revealed no significant differences across conditions in any measure of tremor amplitude or in either measure of tremor frequency. Correlational and Mann-Whitney U-test analyses revealed that none of age, disease duration or medication intake had any significant relationship with tremor amplitude in the control condition or with whether amplitude was altered by weights. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that there is no support for the clinical recommendation of using weighted utensils or weighted wrist cuffs to alleviate postural hand tremor in PD.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
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".