Recommendations of the Polish Society of Physiotherapy, Polish Society of Family Medicine and the College of Family Physicians in Poland in the scope of physiotherapy in the painful shoulder syndrome in primary healthcare
Bibliographic record
Abstract
study Design, B -Data collection, C -statistical analysis, D -Data interpretation, E -manuscript preparation, F -literature search, G -Funds collection the objective of these guidelines in the scope of physiotherapy in primary healthcare is to suggest simple, uncomplicated and more cost-effective physiotherapeutic activities in patients experiencing pain due to painful shoulder syndrome. a general practitioner should decide whether the treatment undertaken within primary healthcare, including the process of physiotherapy, is effective and sufficient, or whether it requires more advanced activities, such as advanced diagnostics and further specialist treatment. the authors of the recommendations, apart from massage, also include procedures in the scope of kinesiotherapy, physiotherapy and orthopedic equipment. according to the authors, the aim of recovering the correct spatial system, called structural homeostasis, in the shoulder girdle, is, first of all, normalization of muscle tension and then inclusion in a rehabilitation program covering the methods to recover and consolidate the correct models of motor activity. the starting point for determining a rehabilitation program should be the ability to prepare a simple assessment of the patient's condition. this may result from a palpation examination to determine the incorrect distribution of resting tension in the area of the muscles and tendons engaged in the pathology and causing pain. the authors believe that such a solution contains the key to reducing the costs of treatment, providing access to physical therapists and quick assistance in the scope of improvement of a patient's clinical condition. at the same time, they emphasize the need to correct the previous healthcare model, so that it becomes a more effective tool in maintaining health.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".