Group Education with Personal Rehabilitation for Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of a group education program with personal rehabilitation for idiopathic Parkinson's disease (IPD). METHODS: A single-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial, with a pre-test/post-test quasi-experimental design. Forty-four stable, non-demented patients with IPD were randomly assigned to an intervention group (n=23) and control group (n=21). Three group lectures on health education specific to IPD were delivered to the intervention group. The theme of lectures was "Not a lonely journey, as your friend, we---experts specializing in IPD---would love to join with you". Three domains of the management of IPD were mentioned: "How to manage your routine Meal, Moving and Mood after suffering from IPD" Each lecture was scheduled for 45 minutes (excluding breaks), and designed as an interactive dialogue rather than a traditional lecture. To strengthen the impact of the lectures, relevant information was published on a website: http://www.parkinsonism.cn/. Following the group lecture, individualized and tailored rehabilitation made up of 24 half-hour sessions over eight weeks were provided for the intervention group. RESULTS: The program ran smoothly and IPD patients were satisfied with this program. After only eight weeks, the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in the intervention group improved significantly (p<0.001). Patients and their caregivers in this group also reported their mood elevations following the program. CONCLUSION: Group education combined with personal rehabilitation program appears to be a beneficial and practical intervention, not only complementing the medical treatment for IPD patients but also meeting the growing demand for long-term care.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".