The Effects of Bilateral Arm Training on Reaching Performance and Activities of Daily Living of Stroke Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[Purpose] To examine effects of Bilateral Arm Training (BAT) on unilateral and bilateral reaching performance and the performance of activities of daily living (ADL) of stroke patients. [Methods] Fifteen participants received 4 weeks of BAT. Unilateral and bilateral reaching were measured using 3D motion analysis. Performance of and client satisfaction with ADL were assessed by the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. The amount and quality of use of the affected upper limb were assessed by the Motor Activity Log. [Results] BAT showed statistically significant improvements in the average and peak velocities during reaching performance, and the amount and quality of use of the affected upper limb. There were statistically significant improvements in the performance of and client satisfaction with ADL. However, the result did not show a statistically significant difference in the trajectory ratio during reaching performance. [Conclusion] BAT was significantly effective at improving the velocity of reaching performance and the performance of ADL by stroke patients. In the future, studies should investigate the effects of the duration and intensity of training, and a variety of BAT protocols need to be developed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".