Active exercise for individuals with cervical dystonia: a pilot randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of an active exercise program for cervical dystonia. DESIGN: Pilot randomized controlled, single-blind trial of a 12-week intervention followed by a four-week follow-up period. SETTING: Supervised physiotherapy and outcome measurement sessions were conducted in a hospital outpatient physiotherapy setting. Participants also performed exercises at home. SUBJECTS: Twenty participants with idiopathic cervical dystonia were randomized into an experimental (n = 9) or control (n = 11) group. Two participants from the experimental group and one from the control group dropped out. INTERVENTIONS: The experimental group undertook a semi-supervised active exercise program aimed at correcting the dystonic head position, plus relaxation. The control group performed relaxation only. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility of the intervention was assessed by recording adherence, muscle soreness, and adverse events. The primary outcome measure was blinded analysis of the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) score. RESULTS: The active exercise program was feasible and safe, with participants in the experimental group completing 84% of prescribed training sessions in the 12-week intervention period. There were no adverse events in either group, while mild muscle soreness was reported by 66% of the experimental group. There was no significant difference between groups at post-test or follow-up. The difference between groups of -1.9 (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.0-5.2) on the TWSTRS demonstrates a trend towards greater improvement for the experimental group. CONCLUSION: Active exercise for people with cervical dystonia is feasible and can be completed with good adherence and no adverse effects.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".