Avaliação da qualidade de vida em indivíduos com distonia cervical
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the quality of life (QOL) of patients with cervical dystonia (CD) and to identify possible aspects that interfere with it. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study with thirty patients from the Centro Catarinense de Reabilitacao in Florianopolis - Brazil, older than 18 years of age, of both sexes and diagnosed with CD that were evaluated between Dec/18-Jan/19 from two instruments: Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale and Craniocervical Dystonia Questionnarie-24 to assess severity and QOL, respectively. Data were described as frequencies, mean and standard deviation. The difference between means was established by Student's T test (p <0.05), from SPSS 18.0. Results: Severity had an average score of 44.6±17.99. The QOL obtained a mean of 44.43±20.2. In the comparison of means of the scales and domains in relation to pain, statistical differences were observed with p<0.05 in the domains Stigma, emotional well-being, social life and total CDQ-24 score. Conclusion: Non-motor symptoms of CD impacts in QOL. The type of CD, presented by the patient, did not show interference in QOL.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".