Fähigkeit von Patienten mit einer peripheren Fazialisparese zur Erkennung von Emotionen – Eine Pilotstudie
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The perception of emotions is an important component in enabling human beings to social interaction in everyday life. Thus, the ability to recognize the emotions of the other one's mime is a key prerequisite for this. OBJECTIVE: The following study aimed at evaluating the ability of subjects with 'peripheral facial paresis' to perceive emotions in healthy individuals. METHODS: A pilot study was conducted in which 13 people with 'peripheral facial paresis' participated. This assessment included the 'Facially Expressed Emotion Labeling-Test' (FEEL-Test), the 'Facial-Laterality-Recognition Test' (FLR-Test) and the 'Toronto-Alexithymie-Scale 26' (TAS 26). The results were compared with data of healthy people from other studies. RESULTS: In contrast to healthy patients, the subjects with 'facial paresis' show more difficulties in recognizing basic emotions; however the results are not significant. The participants show a significant lower level of speed (right/left: p<0.001) concerning the perception of facial laterality compared to healthy people. With regard to the alexithymia, the tested group reveals significantly higher results (p<0.001) compared to the unimpaired people. CONCLUSIONS: The present pilot study does not prove any impact on this specific patient group's ability to recognize emotions and facial laterality. For future studies the research question should be verified in a larger sample size.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.004 |
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 it