MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129760117 · doi:10.21767/2171-6625.100007

The Validation of the Interactive Metronome: A Pilot Study Prior to Implementation for Post Deployment Service Members

2015· article· en· W2129760117 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Leonard Trujillo, Jane Painter Patton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology and Neuroscience · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetronomeSoftware deploymentPsychological interventionTest (biology)Service (business)Service memberPopulationActive dutyMedicinePhysical therapyPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationComputer scienceMilitary personnelPsychiatryEnvironmental healthBusinessOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to validate the protocols created for the Interactive Metronome TM (IM) used in conjunction with the TRX® System for returning post deployment service members diagnosed with mild traumatic brain and/or Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. This was done using a pilot population similar in age and physical status as active duty military, but within a college setting. The pre-established protocols were pilot tested on two male and two female participants. The data collected was from the IM Long Form, Nine Hole Peg Test, Canadian Occupational Performance Model and the Test of Everyday Attention. In a comparative analysis of pre- and post- status it was determined that the IM along with TRX® system would potentially benefit returning post deployment service members using this series of treatment 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 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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurology and NeuroscienceSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207