Effectiveness of Three-Dimensional Multiple-Object Tracking in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Computerized cognitive training remains an attractive supplemental modality to enhance rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis (MS). The objective of the present study was to assess the usability of three-dimensional multiple-object tracking (3D-MOT) in patients with MS. METHODS: In this pilot study, 16 patients with relapsing-remitting MS and nine age-matched controls participated in four 30-minute training sessions of 3D-MOT. Computerized neuropsychological tests, including driving readiness (ie, Useful Field of View) and cognitive function (ie, Stroop Color and Word Test, Paced Visual Serial Addition Test, Symbol Digit Modalities Test) were conducted at baseline and at the conclusion of training. RESULTS: Although scoring lower in 3D-MOT, the MS group improved their 3D-MOT scores in similar magnitude as the control group. The 3D-MOT training led to significant improvements in driving readiness in the MS group. Taken together, 3D-MOT training showed similar effectiveness in patients with MS as in age-matched controls. CONCLUSIONS: Training with 3D-MOT may be an accessible and remotely administrable supplement to cognitive rehabilitation protocols for patients with MS.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".