MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110812575 · doi:10.5014/ajot.2010.09043

Arm–Hand Use in Healthy Older Adults

2010· article· en· W2110812575 on OpenAlex
Debbie Rand, Janice J. Eng

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHemispheric Asymmetry in Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsWristPhysical medicine and rehabilitationFactorial analysisAccelerometerPhysical therapyMedicineHand strengthGrip strengthDominance (genetics)Analysis of varianceRepeated measures designUpper limbActivities of daily livingPsychologyComputer scienceSurgeryMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Our objectives were (1) to quantify arm-hand use of older adults without a disability and to determine the effects of hand dominance, gender, and day on hand usage and (2) to determine the factors that predict arm-hand use. This information will enhance understanding of the extent of the client's occupational performance. METHOD: Twenty men and 20 women, ages 65-85, wore wrist and hip accelerometers for 7 consecutive days. Manual dexterity and grip strength were assessed. A three-way factorial analysis of variance and multiple linear regressions were conducted. RESULTS: The activity kilocounts from both wrist accelerometers revealed a significant interaction effect between hand and gender (F[1, 190] = 24.4, p < .001). Enhanced manual dexterity of the right hand was associated with greater right-hand use. CONCLUSION: Arm-hand use is a novel dimension of hand function measuring the extent of real-life occupational performance in the client's home.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.304 · 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