MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2737481807

Why not away? Moving towards a better understanding of apraxia in stroke

2011· article· en· W2737481807 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dave A Gonzalez, Mark Gravely, Sandra E. Black, Éric Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Exercise, Movement, and Sport · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreHeart and Stroke FoundationSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApraxiaGestureMovement (music)PsychologyStroke (engine)Space (punctuation)Physical medicine and rehabilitationCommunicationCognitive psychologyMedicineComputer sciencePhysicsArtificial intelligenceAcousticsAphasia
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Apraxia is a disorder involving the inability to pantomime or imitate hand gestures; scores for which are frequently derived individually and composite score calculated as performance metric. Such composite scores may obscure important differences among the gestures. Some work suggests movements in peri-personal space toward the body are made more quickly than those in extra-personal space. Furthermore, the aiming literature suggests that movements towards and away are fundamentally different. Therefore this study investigated whether pantomiming tool use was performed equally well if movements toward versus away from the body were assessed. Patients with stroke in the Left (LH) Hemisphere [N=54] or Right (RH) Hemisphere [N=49] were tested and compared to 28 healthy controls. The results indicate that pantomimes involving movement towards the body (Tweezers, Fork, Comb, and Toothbrush) were performed more accurately compared to pantomimes away from the body (Hammer, Knife, Watering Can, and Flipper). While the results revealed that the LH group was the least accurate in gesture performance, the effect of movement direction was comparable across the three groups. These findings support previous work showing the importance of movement direction in peripersonal spaces in determining the accuracy of movement. This direction effect however appears to be independent of apraxia severity, since the direction effect was comparable in LH apractic patients and the other two groups. Acknowledgments: NSERC, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Exercise, Movement, and SportSame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207