MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Motor imagery ability of patients with lower-limb amputation: exploring the course of rehabilitation effects

2019· article· en· W2980306073 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elodie Saruco, Aymeric Guillot, Arnaud Saimpont, Franck Di Rienzo, Anne Durand, Catherine Mercier, Francine Malouin, Philip L. Jackson

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAmputationRehabilitationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationCourse (navigation)Motor imageryPhysical therapySurgeryBrain–computer interfacePsychiatryElectroencephalography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Amputation of a lower-limb results in a severe decrease of functional mobility that deeply alters independent living. Motor imagery (MI) refers to the mental representation of an action without engaging its actual execution. The repetitive use of MI has been shown to contribute to promote motor recovery and phantom-limb pain alleviation. AIM: Given the importance of invoking accurate images to benefit from MI practice, and considering the link between motor capacities and MI, the present study investigated the effect of a rehabilitation program on MI ability in patients with lower-limb amputation. DESIGN: Observational and longitudinal study. SETTING: Patients recruited from the Amputation program at the Institut de Réadaptation en Déficience Physique de Québec (IRDPQ), in Quebec City, Canada. POPULATION: Patients with trans-tibial or transfemoral amputation, following a rehabilitation program as outpatients. METHODS: MI ability of the patients was measured at three different time points along the course of physical therapy. RESULTS: The data revealed a positive effect of the rehabilitation program on MI accuracy of locomotor tasks, and greater MI vividness and accuracy for single-joint movements that patients were still able to physically perform. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that MI abilities and actual motor performance are mirrored in a congruent fashion. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Therapists should consider this critical aspect when including MI practice in rehabilitation programs among patients with lower-limb amputation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation MedicineSame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207