MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The music therapy assessment tool for low awareness states

2007· article· en· W2039181588 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara A Daveson, Wendy L. Magee, L Crewe, G. Beaumont, Pamela Kenealy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultidisciplinary approachRehabilitationPsychologyModality (human–computer interaction)Scale (ratio)Music therapyApplied psychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyMedicineComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many existing assessment tools for patients in low awareness states involve language functioning capabilities. Information regarding the construction and validity of a new assessment tool that relies on music, called the Music Therapy Assessment Tool for Low Awareness States (i.e. MATLAS), is presented in this paper. A total of nine assessments, involving eight patients, were examined. Results from the investigation of scores from three tools: the MATLAS, the Sensory Modality Assessment and Rehabilitation Technique (SMART), and the Wessex Head Injury Matrix Main Scale (WHIM)), as administered by multidisciplinary staff, were analysed, and the MATLAS was found to have good validity with these measures. While limitations involved in this work prevent conclusions about the validity of the MATLAS being drawn, they support the need for further research, and indicate that MATLAS may be a valid tool to assist with multidisciplinary assessment of such patients.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.366 · 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

Citations12
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Therapy and RehabilitationSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207