Musical Neglect Training for Chronic Persistent Unilateral Visual Neglect Post-stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unilateral visual neglect from right hemispheric stroke is a condition that reduces a person’s ability to attend to and process stimuli in their left visual field, resulting in neglect and inattention to the left side of their environment. This perceptual processing deficit can negatively affect individuals’ daily living which in turn reduces functional independence. Musical Neglect Training (MNT) has been developed based on previous research evidence to improve left visual field processing. Two individuals with persistent chronic unilateral visual neglect participated in this study. Participants underwent six individual MNT sessions. Active MNT was used involving exercises on musical equipment (tone bars) to complete musical patterns emphasizing attentional focus towards the neglect visual field. Two standardized assessments (Albert’s and Line Bisection Test) were used. The assessments were administered immediately before and after each of the 6 MNT sessions to assess the within-session effect of MNT. Follow-up testing was done one week after their 6th session to examine the longer-lasting effects of MNT. Paired t-test and Wilcoxon signed rank test were used to examine results. Both participants showed significant improvement pre vs. posttest on the Albert’s Test but not on the Line Bisection Test. The current study presents the positive potential of MNT for patients with chronic persistent visual neglect. In particular, effects were shown for exploratory visuomotor neglect (Albert’s test), but not for egocentric perceptive neglect (Line Bisection Test), and substantiated for within-session effects only. The predictable auditory stimulus patterns associated with object sequences (tone bars) to provide feedback, direct spatial attention and orientation, and initiate intention for movement into the neglect field may offer specific advantages to reduce persistent perceptual attention deficits.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".