Focal Muscle Vibration and Physical Exercise in Postmastectomy Recovery: An Explorative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Physical activity initiation and maintenance are particular challenges in the postmastectomy recovery and in particular Dragon Boat racing seems to be a useful sport activity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of focal muscle vibration as a proprioceptive input to improve upper limb functioning in a group of “paddlers” patients. Methods. A group of paddlers has been evaluated before vibratory treatment (T0), immediately after therapy (T1), after one week (T2), and after one month (T3) with DASH questionnaire, Body Image Scale, McGill pain questionnaire, Constant Scale, and Short Form 36 questionnaire. Results. Fourteen patients showed a significant reduction in disability score (p=0,001) using DASH scale, an improvement of upper limb function (p=0,001) using the Constant scale, and a reduction of pain (p=0,007) at the McGill pain questionnaire. The Mental Composite Score of the Short Form 36 questionnaire showed significant results (p=0,04) while no significant results had been found regarding the physical mental score (p=0,08) . Conclusion. Focal muscle vibration may be a useful treatment in a postmastectomy recovery of upper limb functionality.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".