Prolonged-Release Fampridine as Adjunct Therapy to Active Motor Training in MS Patients: A Pilot, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Both prolonged-release fampridine (PRF) and enabling active motor training (EAMT) are beneficial in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. Their combined effect is, however, understudied. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to determine if PRF augments the beneficial effect of EAMT in MS patients as opposed to placebo. METHOD: = 20). All patients underwent EAMT during the first six weeks. Patients were assessed at -4, 0, 6 and 14 weeks. RESULTS: Both groups remained stable between -4 to 0 weeks and showed statistically significant improvements for the six-minute walk and the five-times-sit-to-stand test at weeks 6 and 14. The PRF-treated group achieved a greater mean percentage improvement and a higher incidence of responders in all three tasks at both time points. The study was, however, underpowered to reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Our results confirm previous studies demonstrating that MS patients, despite significant disability, do benefit from a rehabilitation program. Our study is the first to show a trend suggesting that PRF in MS patients appears to enhance the benefit of EAMT. Further studies are required to confirm this.Clinical trial registration number with Clinicaltrial.gov: NCT02146534.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".