USE OF FORMOTEROL IN THE TREATMENT OF STUTTERING. A PILOT STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Stuttering is a serious health and social problem that can distinctively affect not only the mental development of an individual but also his life possibilities, including social fulfilment and his general life prospects. The etiology of stuttering is however unknown and that is why it is not possible to treat it causally. This pilot study takes into account the hypothesis of bronchial constriction as a negative factor in stuttering and investigates the effect of the long-acting bronchodilator formoterol fumarate on stuttering in 42 patients. METHODS: Patients were divided in 2 groups - A (school children and juveniles) and B (adults 18-25 resistant to other treatment). The medicine was administered once a day in the morning in a dose of 12 microg for the total period of 6 months. The prime outcome parameter - severity of stuttering - was evaluated using the ordinary scale (McGill Pain Questionnaire). The evaluation was done by an examining physician during visits to the centres and by the patients themselves (in cases of the youngest with the assistance of a parent) in a daily diary. RESULTS: A non-parametric pair test (Wilcoxon signed rank test) was used to compare the average marks in the whole set of patients. During the six moth period of administration of Foradil the speech fluency improved. The average number of dysfluent words decreased from 10.5 +/- 1.3 to 6.6 +/-0.97. CONCLUSION: The average mark of speech fluency evaluated by the physicians between the period of non use of Foradil and the six month period after the use of Foradil improved from 2.95 +/- 0.76 to 1.95 +/- 0.56 (as proved by the chi-square test, p<0.0001). The evaluation of speech fluency of balbuties uses the logopedic practices. Other clinical evaluations of speech fluency are not known.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".