The Consequences of Oromandibular Dystonia on Communicative Participation: A Qualitative Study of the Insider's Experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study was to obtain a self-reported account of the experience of living with oromandibular dystonia (OMD) to gain a better understanding of both the daily facilitators and barriers to communicative participation and the strategies used for adapting to life with OMD. Method Eight individuals with OMD and dysarthria participated in 1 face-to-face, semistructured interview. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative, phenomenological methods of coding, immersion, and emergence were used in the analysis of interview data. Results Three major themes and 7 subthemes emerged from the analysis of interview data. First, "speaking is different now" provided examples of how speech changes are manifested in various life situations. Second, "my roles have changed" addressed how OMD has impacted work, home, and social roles. Third, "I accept it and move on" involved finding strategies that help and adopting a different perspective. Conclusion We suggest that the management of OMD must take a more holistic approach by addressing consequences beyond the physical symptoms and be tailored to each individual based on his or her personal concerns and goals.
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 | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".