Effect of Imagery Perspective on Occupational Performance After Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This preliminary study sought to determine whether the imagery perspective used during mental practice (MP) differentially influenced performance outcomes after stroke. METHOD: Nineteen participants with unilateral subacute stroke (9 men and 10 women, ages 28-77) were randomly allocated to one of three groups. All groups received 30-min occupational therapy sessions 2×/wk for 6 wk. Experimental groups received MP training in functional tasks using either an internal or an external perspective; the control group received relaxation imagery training. Participants were pre- and posttested using the Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment (FMA), the Jebsen-Taylor Test of Hand Function (JTTHF), and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). RESULTS: At posttest, the internal and external experimental groups showed statistically similar improvements on the FMA and JTTHF (p < .05). All groups improved on the COPM (p < .05). CONCLUSION: MP combined with occupational therapy improves upper-extremity recovery after stroke. MP does not appear to enhance self-perception of performance. This preliminary study suggests that imagery perspective may not be an important variable in MP interventions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".