Anaerobic muscle performance of children after long-term recovery from Guillain-Barré syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate anaerobic muscle performance in children after long-term recovery from Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). Participants were recruited from all children and adolescents with GBS admitted to The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Canada, between 1988 and 1995. We assessed 17 children (nine males, eight females; mean age at GBS diagnosis 7 years 11 months, SD 4 years 2 months; mean age at testing 14 years 1 month) more than two years after acute GBS. Participants completed the Wingate anaerobic test to evaluate mean and peak muscle power. For mean arm muscle power (mean 47.5% [SD 17.4%] of normal), only two participants were in the normal range. For mean leg muscle power (mean 83% [SD 28.3%] of normal), 15 participants were in the normal range. For arm peak power (mean 92.6% [SD 20.7%] of normal), 12 participants were in the normal range. For leg peak power (mean 116.3% of normal, SD 15.8%), all participants were in the normal range. Detailed manual muscle testing with the modified Medical Research Council scale was done on 34 muscle groups. Data were pooled to give a mean arm and leg muscle strength score (9.7, SD 0.30 and 9.4, SD 0.50 respectively). Pearson's correlations of muscle endurance with arm and leg strength were not significant. Children with GBS have excellent long-term recovery of peak muscle power. Muscle endurance, measured by mean muscle power, was normal in the legs but markedly low in the arms. Pediatric rehabilitation programs after GBS should specifically target endurance of arm muscles.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".