MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984443687 · doi:10.1310/tsr1806-728

A Pilot Study of Rhythm and Timing Training as a Supplement to Occupational Therapy in Stroke Rehabilitation

2011· article· en· W1984443687 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Valerie Hill, Leah Dunn, Kari Dunning, Stephen J. Page

Bibliographic record

VenueTopics in Stroke Rehabilitation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationPhysical therapyStroke (engine)MedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationQuality of life (healthcare)Occupational therapyActivities of daily livingMetronomeIntervention (counseling)RhythmNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Stroke is the leading cause of disability. A need exists for an effective intervention to enhance upper extremity (UE) motor abilities and activities of daily living (ADL) performance. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this pilot study were to (1) determine the feasibility of adding Interactive Metronome (IM) to an occupational therapy (OT) program; and (2) determine changes in UE impairments, function, quality of life, and perceived physical performance ability and satisfaction using a combined IM + OT regimen compared with OT alone for adults with chronic stroke. METHODS: This pilot study (n=10) used a 2-group (OT or IM+OT) pretest-posttest design. The intervention involved 60 minutes of IM + OT or OT alone, 3 days a week for 10 weeks. Outcome measures included the UE Fugl-Meyer (impairment), the Arm Motor Ability Test (function), the Box and Block Test (function), Stroke Impact Scale (quality of life), and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (perceived performance ability and satisfaction). RESULTS: It was feasible to add IM to OT. The IM+OT group demonstrated decreased impairment and increased quality of life. However, the OT-alone group demonstrated greater gains in function, perceived physical performance ability, and satisfaction. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that rhythm and timing training using the IM is a feasible intervention to consider as part of therapy treatment. However, IM may fit best for prefunctional treatment, as it seemed to primarily decrease impairment. It may also serve as a supplement before or after treatment in order to maximize rehabilitation potential. Clinical implications and suggestions for future studies are provided.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.825

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTopics in Stroke RehabilitationSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207