Evaluation of performance and personal satisfaction of the patient with spastic hand after using a volar dorsal orthosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The performance and the satisfaction of the patient were quantitatively compared with the use of the volar dorsal orthosis in order to position the spastic hand. Thirty patients wearing the orthosis for eight hours daily were evaluated by the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure and the box and blocks test, for a three-month period. Five activities were selected (among daily life activities, productive activities, and leisure activities) by the patients, which were impaired by spasticity. There was an improvement related to performance after use of orthosis, with an average of 1.4 + or - 0.5 to 6.3 + or - 0.8 (p<0.01). Patient satisfaction average after wearing the orthosis was of 1.7 + or - 0.4 to 6.3 + or - 0.6 (p<0.01). In this casuistic, the use of orthosis for wrist and finger spasticity has shown an improvement in the functional performance and patient satisfaction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".