MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3088025456 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039650

Multicentre, single-blind randomised controlled trial comparing MyndMove neuromodulation therapy with conventional therapy in traumatic spinal cord injury: a protocol study

2020· article· en· W3088025456 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kim D. Anderson, James R. Wilson, Radha Korupolu, Jacqueline Pierce, James M. Bowen, Daria O’Reilly, Naaz Kapadia, Miloš R. Popović, Lehana Thabane, Kristin E. Musselman

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonToronto Rehabilitation InstituteTelus (Canada)ImpactMcMaster UniversityUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoToronto Public Health
FundersMedical Research and Materiel CommandNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsMedicineSpinal cord injuryNeuromodulationRandomized controlled trialSingle blindProtocol (science)Physical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSpinal cordSurgeryAlternative medicinePsychiatryInternal medicineCentral nervous systemPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: This protocol is describing a multicentre, single-blind randomised controlled trial. The objective is to compare the efficacy of MyndMove therapy versus conventional therapy (CT) in improving upper extremity function in individuals with C4-C7 traumatic, incomplete spinal cord injury (SCI). It is being conducted in two US and two Canadian SCI rehabilitation centres. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Sixty people aged 18 years or older with a C4-C7 incomplete (AIS B-D) SCI between 4 months and 8 years postinjury are randomised to receive 40 sessions of MyndMove neuromodulation therapy or CT within a 14-week period of time. Therapy sessions are 1 hour in duration with a dose of 3-5 sessions per week. Assessments occur prior to randomisation, after 20 sessions, after 40 sessions and 10 weeks after the last session. The primary outcome measure is the efficacy of MyndMove therapy versus CT in improving upper extremity function as measured by Spinal Cord Independence Measure III: Self-Care subscore after 40 sessions. Secondary outcomes include: (1) improvements in the SCIM mobility subscore; (2) upper limb functions measured by Graded Redefined Assessment of Strength, Sensibility and Prehension and (3) Toronto Rehab Institute Hand Function Test; (4) To assess safety as measured by serious and non-serious adverse events recorded for participants in both groups of the study population over the duration of the study; (5) to compare the change in quality of life as measured by the Spinal Cord Injury-Quality of Life; and (6) to evaluate the impact on healthcare resource utilisation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All ethical approvals were obtained prior to enrolling any participants. Dissemination of the results of the study will be made at peer-reviewed academic meetings and through peer-reviewed medical journals TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03439319.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.003

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 head0.355
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.159 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicSpinal Cord Injury Research→French-language works237,207→