MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802996540 · doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7871

Anodal Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation to Enhance Rehabilitation in Individuals With Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy: A Triple-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

2018· article· en· W2802996540 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amélie Fournier Belley, Catherine Mercier, Maude Bastien, Guillaume Léonard, Nathaly Gaudreault, Jean‐Sébastien Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTranscranial direct-current stimulationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRotator cuffRandomized controlled trialTendinopathyRehabilitationPhysical therapyTranscranial magnetic stimulationStimulationNeuromodulationTendonSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Anodal transcranial direct-current stimulation (a-tDCS) has been shown to enhance the effects of sensorimotor training in neurological populations. Sensorimotor training leads to reduced pain and increased function in the treatment of rotator cuff tendinopathy. The addition of a-tDCS during a rehabilitation program centered on sensorimotor training may improve treatment outcomes in individuals with rotator cuff tendinopathy. Objective To compare 2 groups of individuals with rotator cuff tendinopathy, one receiving a rehabilitation program centered on sensorimotor training with a-tDCS and the other receiving the same rehabilitation program with sham a-tDCS. Methods In this triple-blind, parallel-group randomized controlled trial, 40 adults with rotator cuff tendinopathy participated in a 6-week rehabilitation program (8 treatments with home exercises and including sensorimotor training, patient education, and strengthening). They were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups to receive either real a-tDCS (stimulation, 1.5 mA for 30 minutes) or sham a-tDCS during the first 5 treatments. Symptoms and functional limitations (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index) of all participants were evaluated at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 weeks. Acromiohumeral distances (ultrasonographic measurement at 0°, 45°, and 60° of arm elevation) were assessed at baseline and 6 weeks. Two-way or 3-way repeated-measures analyses of variance were used for statistical analyses. Results Both groups showed statistically significant improvement in Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire and Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index scores at 3, 6, and 12 weeks, and in acromiohumeral distance at 45° and 60° at 6 weeks (P<.05). No significant group-by-time interaction was observed for all outcomes (P>.43). Conclusion Results do not demonstrate any improved treatment outcomes from the addition of a-tDCS during a rehabilitation program for individuals with rotator cuff tendinopathy. Level of Evidence Therapy, level 1b. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(7):541-551. Epub 10 May 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7871.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations34
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical TherapySame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207