MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122208925 · doi:10.1109/cne.2007.369743

Motor Learning in a Virtual Environment for Vestibular Rehabilitation

2007· article· en· W2122208925 on OpenAlexaff
Kristiina M. Valter McConville, Sumandeep Virk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVestibular rehabilitationRehabilitationVirtual realityVirtual machineTask (project management)Physical medicine and rehabilitationVestibular systemMotor learningMotor skillComputer scienceAudiologyPsychologyHuman–computer interactionMedicinePhysical therapyEngineeringDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Falls are a major risk to quality of life particularly in individuals with vestibular disorders. Studies show that virtual environments can provide a solution in vestibular rehabilitation. In this paper, a low cost virtual reality game was evaluated with respect to its effect on the user motor skills as measured by game performance scores. The performance scores included task completion time and accuracy, reflecting improvement in motor response patterns. Two levels of difficulty were used in the experiment, which was conducted in nine sessions over the course of three weeks. It was found that subjects felt very immersed in the environment and that user performance increased gradually in the environment. Head movements were required by the game consistently throughout the experiment period for both difficulty levels. The results suggest that this environment could be used in vestibular rehabilitation as it encourages head movements and trains motor responses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVestibular and auditory disordersFrench-language works237,207