MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013650781 · doi:10.1159/000338248

Oral Sensorimotor Integration in Adults Who Stutter

2012· article· en· W2013650781 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFolia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicStuttering Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
KeywordsStutteringAudiologyMedicinePsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between tendon vibration sensitivity and oral motor control in adults who stutter (AWS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ten controls and 10 AWS first made jaw-opening movements from a closed-mouth position to an 18-mm target. Then, masseter tendon vibration was applied during jaw opening in a separate condition to test whether accuracy and/or variability is related to movement undershoot. RESULTS: AWS made less accurate and more variable jaw movements than controls without visual feedback. Among the normally fluent adult participants, higher accuracy and lower variability were significantly related to masseter vibration undershoot, but significant correlations were not observed for AWS. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that increased tendon vibration sensitivity may be related to more refined oral motor control. Subtle sensorimotor limitations could be present in stuttering that render speech more susceptible to breakdowns.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.225
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.322 · 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