Effects of Weakness on Symmetrical Bilateral Grip Force Exertion in Subjects With Hemiparesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been shown that, in a bilateral force-matching task, subjects presenting weakness in one limb produce a lower force in the weakened limb even though they subjectively perceive that they are exerting the same force. The aim of this study was to verify whether subjects with hemiparesis produced asymmetrical forces during a bilateral submaximal grip task and whether this asymmetry is related to weakness of the paretic limb. Fifteen subjects with hemiparesis and 15 healthy subjects were recruited. First, the maximal voluntary force was measured for each hand. Then, subjects were asked to exert equal forces with both hands simultaneously at three submaximal force levels using two dynamometers. In the bilateral task, the force ratios (paretic/nonparetic or nondominant/dominant) differed between groups. Severely weak hemiparetic subjects produced lower force ratios than mildly weak hemiparetic subjects and healthy subjects (P < 0.000), whereas there was no difference between the force ratios produced by mildly weak hemiparetic subjects and those produced by healthy subjects. In subjects with hemiparesis, the force ratios in the bilateral task were related to the ratios of maximal voluntary forces (R2 = 0.39-0.66, P < or = 0.013) and the presence of somatosensory impairment did not affect these relationships. These results suggest that the strategy used is to compare the intensity of the motor commands on both sides and then perform the force-matching task. The use of such a strategy by subjects who have had paresis for 1 year reflects a lack of adaptation to their weakness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".