MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2254375208 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2015.00272

Neurorehabilitation for Multiple Sclerosis Patients with Emotional Dysfunctions

2016· review· en· W2254375208 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuwen Hung, Pavel Yarmak

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNeurorehabilitationMultiple sclerosisDiseaseQuality of life (healthcare)MedicineDepression (economics)Intensive care medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyPhysical therapyPsychotherapistPsychiatryRehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depression frequently develops in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, exacerbating the manifestations of the disease and making its management challenging. To date, no consensus has been reached regarding effective treatments for these sufferers due to limited understanding regarding the underlying mechanisms responsible for emotional disorders that are highly comorbid with this disease. There is an urgent need to rethink current treatment options for these patients. This article aims to optimize the treatment outcomes and improve the quality of life for MS patients. Based on an in-depth and critical review of the current literature, we provide a neurorehabilitative framework that explains possible regulatory mechanisms underlying the emotional symptoms highly developed in MS. This article offers practical knowledge and therapeutic strategies to optimize the treatment options in the current care system for MS, as well as for other disabling diseases.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207