A Descriptive Correlational Study to Evaluate Three Measures of Assessing Upper Extremity Function in Individuals with Multiple Sclerosis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Activities of daily living and quality of life (QOL) are hindered by upper extremity (UE) impairments experienced by individuals with multiple sclerosis (iMS). The Nine-Hole Peg Test (9-HPT) is most frequently used to measure UE function. However, it does not measure peoples’ ability to perform routine tasks in daily life and may not be useful in iMS who cannot pick up the pegs utilized in the 9-HPT. Therefore, we evaluated three measures to explore a more comprehensive assessment of UE function: Upper Extremity Function Scale (UEFS), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), and the 9-HPT. The objectives were to quantitatively assess the relationship between these measures of UE function, understand if the measures correlate with QOL as calculated by the MS Quality of Life-54 (MSQOL-54), and to determine differences in the measures based on employment status. Methods. 112 (79 female) iMS were prospectively recruited for this descriptive correlational study. Inclusion criteria were as follows: confirmed diagnosis of MS or clinically isolated syndrome, <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"> <a:mtext>age</a:mtext> <a:mo>≥</a:mo> <a:mn>18</a:mn> </a:math> years, and ability to self-consent. All statistical analyses including Spearman’s correlation coefficient ( <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"> <c:msub> <c:mrow> <c:mi>r</c:mi> </c:mrow> <c:mrow> <c:mi>s</c:mi> </c:mrow> </c:msub> </c:math> ) and Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed using SPSS. Results. A moderate correlation ( <e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"> <e:msub> <e:mrow> <e:mi>r</e:mi> </e:mrow> <e:mrow> <e:mi>s</e:mi> </e:mrow> </e:msub> <e:mo>=</e:mo> <e:mo>−</e:mo> <e:mn>0.51</e:mn> </e:math> ; <g:math xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M4"> <g:mi>p</g:mi> <g:mo><</g:mo> <g:mn>0.001</g:mn> </g:math> ) was found between the ARAT and 9-HPT scores for the more impaired hand. Likewise, a moderate correlation was found between UEFS and the physical health composite scores (PHCSs) of MSQOL-54 ( <i:math xmlns:i="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M5"> <i:msub> <i:mrow> <i:mi>r</i:mi> </i:mrow> <i:mrow> <i:mi>s</i:mi> </i:mrow> </i:msub> <i:mo>=</i:mo> <i:mo>−</i:mo> <i:mn>0.59</i:mn> </i:math> ; <k:math xmlns:k="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M6"> <k:mi>p</k:mi> <k:mo><</k:mo> <k:mn>0.001</k:mn> </k:math> ). Finally, performances on ARAT, 9-HPT, and UEFS differed between the employed individuals and those on long-term disability ( <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M7"> <m:mi>p</m:mi> <m:mo>=</m:mo> <m:mn>0.007</m:mn> </m:math> , <o:math xmlns:o="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M8"> <o:mi>p</o:mi> <o:mo><</o:mo> <o:mn>0.001</o:mn> </o:math> , and <q:math xmlns:q="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M9"> <q:mi>p</q:mi> <q:mo>=</q:mo> <q:mn>0.001</q:mn> </q:math> ). Conclusion. The UEFS moderately correlated with the QOL measure, and considering the UESF is a patient-reported outcome, it could be used to complement routinely captured measures of assessing UE function. Further study is warranted to determine which measure, or combination of measures, is more sensitive to changes in UE function over time.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it