Trunk strength and function using the multidirectional reach distance in individuals with non-traumatic spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Trunk control is essential to engage in activities of daily living. Measuring trunk strength and function in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) is difficult. Trunk function has not been studied in non-traumatic SCI (NTSCI). OBJECTIVES: To characterize changes in trunk strength and seated functional reach in individuals with NTSCI during inpatient rehabilitation. To determine if trunk strength and seated reach differ between walkers and wheelchair users. To explore relationships between trunk and hip strength and seated functional reach. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Two SCI rehabilitation facilities. PARTICIPANTS: 32 subacute inpatients (mean age 48.0 ± 15.4 years). OUTCOME MEASURES: Isometric strength of trunk and hip and function (Multidirectional Reach Test: MDRT) were assessed at admission and within 2 weeks of discharge. Analysis of variance was conducted for admission measures (MDRT, hip and trunk strength) between walkers and wheelchair users. Changes in MDRT, hip and trunk strength were evaluated using parametric and non-parametric statistics. The level of association between changes in values of MRDT and strength was also examined. RESULTS: Significant differences between walkers and wheelchair users were found for strength measures (P < 0.05) but not for MDRT. Left- and right-sided reaches increased in wheelchair users only (P < 0.05). Associations between changes in hip strength, trunk strength, and reach distance were found (R = 0.67-0.73). CONCLUSION: In clinical settings, it is feasible and relevant to assess trunk, hip strength, and MRDT. Future studies require strategies to increase the number of participants assessed, in order to inform clinicians about relevant rehabilitation 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".