Impact of modafinil on spasticity reduction and quality of life in children with CP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This randomized double blind AB/BA cross-over trial evaluates the effect of oral modafinil versus placebo on spasticity, function, and quality of life in children with cerebral palsy (CP). Outcomes were measured at the start and end of both 8-week treatment periods (modafinil and placebo). The order of the treatment periods was randomly assigned. There was a 4-week wash-out period between treatments. Primary outcomes include the Modified Ashworth Score (MAS), and the Caregiver Priorities and Child Health Index of Life with Disabilities (CPCHILD), a disorder-specific quality of life measure. Ten children were randomized and eight children completed the study. The mean age of participants was 11 years 5 months (SD 1 y 5 mo, range 8 y 8 mo-12 y 11 mo). Five of the participants were male and three female. Seven children had a diagnosis of spastic quadriplegic CP and one child had spastic diplegia with overflow tone to the upper extremities. The Gross Motor Function Classification System ranged from Level III to V with one child at Level III, six children at Level IV, and one at Level V. The CPCHILD pre- to post-total scores showed a slight improvement in quality of life during the placebo period and a slight deterioration in the modafinil period (overall mean change of 7.1, SD 7.6). A t-test between post differences was statistically significant (t=2.65, p=0.03) in favor of the placebo period. The MAS for elbow flexors, ankle flexors, and hip adductors did not show any significant reduction post-modafinil or post-placebo (p values ranged from 0.41-0.79). This study did not find evidence that modafinil reduces spasticity or has a positive impact on quality of life in children with spastic CP.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".