The impact of cervical radiculopathy on upper extremity motor preparation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cervical radiculopathy is a common clinical description for patients with upper extremity sensorimotor dysfunction originating at the spine. Clinically, outcome measures for assessment are often based on subjective patient reported outcome measures. Such subjective measures have limitations including language and cognitive barriers. Reaction time can be used as a measure of motor preparation. The purpose of the present experiment was to determine if a reaction time task could be useful to discern differences in motor preparation between participants with cervical radiculopathy (n=9) from healthy controls (n=11). Using a between groups, cross sectional design, an upper extremity aiming task with variable levels of difficulty was performed. Participants recruited from a hospital based pre-surgical spine assessment clinic or the general community performed vertically oriented aiming movements in the sagittal plane to targets at three different heights, using two different target sizes. Participants with cervical radiculopathy demonstrated significantly longer reaction times than healthy control participants. The results of the present study provide preliminary evidence that reaction time measures may be appropriate to consider in the performance based assessment of patients with cervical radiculopathy. The exploration of further performance-based measures of the upper extremity are warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".