MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Executive Function: Application in the Rehabilitation of Chronic Pain

2012· review· en· W1987157285 on OpenAlexaff
Zakir Uddin, Joy C. MacDermid, Victoria Galea

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CentreWestern UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationChronic painPhysical medicine and rehabilitationContext (archaeology)Sensory systemMedicineCognitionPhysical therapyNeurosciencePsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Executive function (EF) is a control mechanism of human cognition that provides the capability to select actions in relation to internal goals organized by the prefrontal cortex (PFC). The PFC is essential for the temporal integration of sensory information in the sequencing of optimum motor behavior to achieve an internal goal. The temporal integration of sensory information also explains why the PFC has an additional role in the central modulation of pain. Pain modulation and motor function are altered in chronic pain, and this alteration can contribute to the reduced physical activity. EF is the driver of conscious control of thought and action that is critical to rehabilitation in chronic pain. However, EF is impaired in chronic pain. Rehabilitation practitioners typically use activity modification, exercise, and movement to enhance function in patients with chronic pain; exercise has beneficial effects on EF. However, impairments in EF can be barriers to adherence to exercise, activity, and lifestyle modifications required to optimize rehabilitation. Greater awareness of EF can enhance rehabilitation. This narrative review explores current theories of EF structure and function, how impairment of EF can be assessed in a clinical context, and its implications for rehabilitation in chronic pain.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews in Physical and Rehabilitation MedicineSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207