MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792201847 · doi:10.1080/09638288.2018.1451924

Three-dimensional assessment of the asymptomatic and post-stroke shoulder: intra-rater test–retest reliability and within-subject repeatability of the palpation and digitization approach

2018· article· en· W2792201847 on OpenAlexafffund
Liza A. M. Pain, Ross Baker, Qazi Zain Sohail, Denyse Richardson, Karl Zabjek, Jeremy P.M. Mogk, Anne Agur

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsAutodesk (Canada)University Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoToronto Rehabilitation Institute
FundersOntario Stroke NetworkInternational Society of Biomechanics
KeywordsShouldersAsymptomaticPalpationMedicinePhysical therapyStroke (engine)Physical medicine and rehabilitationShoulder jointReliability (semiconductor)RepeatabilityOrthodonticsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Altered three-dimensional (3D) joint kinematics can contribute to shoulder pathology, including post-stroke shoulder pain. Reliable assessment methods enable comparative studies between asymptomatic shoulders of healthy subjects and painful shoulders of post-stroke subjects, and could inform treatment planning for post-stroke shoulder pain. The study purpose was to establish intra-rater test–retest reliability and within-subject repeatability of a palpation/digitization protocol, which assesses 3D clavicular/scapular/humeral rotations, in asymptomatic and painful post-stroke shoulders.Methods: Repeated measurements of 3D clavicular/scapular/humeral joint/segment rotations were obtained using palpation/digitization in 32 asymptomatic and six painful post-stroke shoulders during four reaching postures (rest/flexion/abduction/external rotation). Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs), standard error of the measurement and 95% confidence intervals were calculated.Results: All ICC values indicated high to very high test–retest reliability (≥0.70), with lower reliability for scapular anterior/posterior tilt during external rotation in asymptomatic subjects, and scapular medial/lateral rotation, humeral horizontal abduction/adduction and axial rotation during abduction in post-stroke subjects. All standard error of measurement values demonstrated within-subject repeatability error ≤5° for all clavicular/scapular/humeral joint/segment rotations (asymptomatic ≤3.75°; post-stroke ≤5.0°), except for humeral axial rotation (asymptomatic ≤5°; post-stroke ≤15°).Conclusions: This noninvasive, clinically feasible palpation/digitization protocol was reliable and repeatable in asymptomatic shoulders, and in a smaller sample of painful post-stroke shoulders.Implications for RehabilitationIn the clinical setting, a reliable and repeatable noninvasive method for assessment of three-dimensional (3D) clavicular/scapular/humeral joint orientation and range of motion (ROM) is currently required.The established reliability and repeatability of this proposed palpation/digitization protocol will enable comparative 3D ROM studies between asymptomatic and post-stroke shoulders, which will further inform treatment planning.Intra-rater test–retest repeatability, which is measured by the standard error of the measure, indicates the range of error associated with a single test measure. Therefore, clinicians can use the standard error of the measure to determine the “true” differences between pre-treatment and post-treatment test scores.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207