A new method for tongue rehabilitation with computer games: Pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lingual exercises are commonly used in clinical practice for swallowing rehabilitation. Associating lingual exercises with computer games increases motivation, which influences tongue motor performance. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of tongue movement direction; resistance force level; repetition number; sustained tongue contraction duration; age and gender on tongue motor performance in healthy adults using computer games. METHODS: An observational pilot study was carried out at a university laboratory. Nine healthy adults, aged 22 to 38 years, used an intra-oral joystick controlled by the tongue to play four computer games. The participants had to reach 12 targets that appeared on the computer screen using the intra-oral joystick. Motor performance was measured by the number of attempts to score and the time during which the target force was maintained. Tongue motor performance was compared among tongue movement direction, resistance force level, game round number, and continuous force application time on the target, age and gender. RESULTS: The number of attempts depended significantly on the direction, continuous force application time on the target and age. The time during which the target force was maintained depended significantly on the direction, continuous force application time on the target and game round number. There were no significant differences in the comparisons by gender or by resistance force level. CONCLUSIONS: It was seen that young adults had their best performance in the downward direction, on the third round, holding the force for a shorter time. The performance deteriorated as age increased.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".