MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2259414089 · doi:10.4236/jbbs.2016.61006

Behavioural and Neurophysiological Effects of a Stroke Rehabilitation Program on Emotional Processing in Tuberothalamic Infarct—Case Study

2016· article· en· W2259414089 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katarzyna Kucharska, Ewelina Wilkos, Roman Stefański, Grzegorz Makowicz, Danuta Ryglewicz, Ksenia Sławińska, Ewa Piątkowska-Janko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Behavioral and Brain Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyRehabilitationToronto Alexithymia ScaleStroke (engine)Emotion perceptionAnxietyAngerAudiologyClinical psychologyPerceptionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePsychiatryNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the study was to assess the neurophysiological and behavioural effects of a stroke rehabilitation involving Treatment As Usual (TAU) combined with Social Cognitive Training (SCT) in a right-handed patient suffered from tuberothalamic infarct compared to healthy controls (HCs) (n = 13). Methods: Both HCs and the patient were assessed by means of the following measures: Penn Emotion Perception Battery (ER40, EmoDiff40, PEAT40, PFMT), Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test, and Toronto Alexithymia Scale alongside clinical scales (Mini Mental State Examination, The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, and Hamilton Depression Scale). The SCT was delivered individually for 60 minutes weekly in a 12-week program (12 sessions). The subject participated twice in a fMRI scanning session including the event-related task of implicit processing of 100% fearful expressions to detect physiological changes after TAU plus SCT and compared them with HCS who underwent the same assessment once. Results: Compared with HCs, the patient before therapy revealed lower scores in emotion recognition; particularly perception of anger was affected alongside worse performance on both emotion discrimination and acuity tests. After therapy, B.D. showed improvement in emotional processing. B.D. had less post-therapy activation maps compared with pretherapy ones and more significantly activated pre-and post-central gyrus and right cerebellum in response to fearful faces. Interestingly, no amygdala was significantly activated as the response to fearful stimuli before or after therapy was completed. Conclusions: Further research was needed to increase understanding about efficacy of SCT and the theory of neuroplasticity, thus helping rehabilitation programs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Behavioral and Brain ScienceSame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207