MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113670367 · doi:10.1093/ptj/80.9.886

Use of Visual Feedback in Retraining Balance Following Acute Stroke

2000· article· en· W2113670367 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBalance (ability)RetrainingPhysical medicine and rehabilitationHemiparesisPhysical therapyBerg Balance ScaleCenter of pressure (fluid mechanics)Visual feedbackStroke (engine)Repeated measures designVisual analogue scaleAnalysis of varianceRandomized controlled trialMedicinePsychologyRehabilitationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Visual feedback related to weight distribution and center-of-pressure positioning has been shown to be effective in increasing stance symmetry following stroke, although it is not clear whether functional balance ability also improves. This study compared the relative effectiveness of visual feedback training of center-of-gravity (CoG) positioning with conventional physical therapy following acute stroke. SUBJECTS: Forty-six people who had strokes within 80 days before the study, resulting in unilateral hemiparesis, and who were in need of balance retraining participated. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Initially, subjects were randomly assigned to visual feedback or conventional physical therapy groups for balance retraining until 16 subjects per group were recruited. The next 14 subjects were assigned to a control group. All subjects received physical therapy and occupational therapy (regular therapy) 2 hours a day, and subjects in the 2 experimental groups received additional balance training 30 minutes a day until discharge. The visual feedback group received information about their CoG position as they shifted their weight during various activities. The conventional therapy group received verbal and tactile cues to encourage symmetrical stance and weight shifting. Static (postural sway) and activity-based measures of balance (Berg Balance Scale, gait speed, and the Timed "Up & Go" Test) were contrasted across the 3 groups at baseline, at discharge, and at 1 month following discharge using an analysis of variance for repeated measures. RESULTS: All groups demonstrated marked improvement over time for all measures of balance ability, with the greatest improvements occurring in the period from baseline to discharge. No between-group differences were detected in any of the outcome measures. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION: Visual feedback or conventional balance training in addition to regular therapy affords no added benefit when offered in the early stages of rehabilitation following stroke.

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)0.000
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 score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.345 · 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