MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cognitive Potentials after Stroke-Somatotherapy and Occupational Therapy

2016· article· en· W2560347204 on OpenAlex
Lejla Matović, Alma Glinac

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Physiotherapy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCognitionOccupational therapyStroke (engine)Montreal Cognitive AssessmentPhysical therapyTest (biology)Statistical significanceCognitive testPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicineCognitive impairmentPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Focal brain lesions or more small lesions due to stroke can cause measurable damage to cognitive potential. The aim of this paper is to examine the cognitive potential in people who are suffering from a stroke, according to the outcomes of tests of cognitive potential to create and implement somatotherapy and occupational therapy, and after completion of therapy final test of cognitive potential.Methods: A retrospective study was conducted with 64 patients who were suffering from a stroke. The subjects were recommended to somatotherapy and occupational therapy by a physiatrist. Before creating these therapies conducted initial measurement of cognitive potential MoCA test. Score 26-30 points is considered normal, while a score below 26 points indicates the presence of cognitive disorders. For those with a score less than 26 points on the initial examination of the individual created somatotherapy and occupational therapy, as well as for those with a score higher than 26 points to monitor cognitive potential. After the somatotherapy and occupational therapy for a period of 21 days, after 30 minutes during the day, measured the effects of these therapies final testing of cognitive potential MoCA test.Result: On initial examination score <26 points was present in 92.4% of respondents, a score> 26 points was present in 7.8% of respondents, while the final test score of <26 points was present in 78.4% of respondents, while score> 26 points was present in 21.9%. The statistical significance level of p <.005 between the initial and final tests of cognitive potential MoCA test confirmed the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks test, while the statistical significance level of p <.001, confirmed Spearman's correlation coefficient.Conclusion: This study confirmed the reliability of MoCA test at the initial and final testing the presence of cognitive impairment potential in people with stroke, and reliability is confirmed and when examining the effects of intensive use of individually created somatotherapy and occupational therapy to reduce the damage of cognitive potential. This study confirmed the positive effects of intensive use of individually created somatotherapy and occupational therapy to reduce cognitive impairment potential in people with stroke.

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 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.318 · 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