Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to determine whether the efficacy of considering handedness constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) affects the performance level of the activities of daily living (ADL) and hand function in a chronic traumatic brain injury patient. The design of this study was a case report. The subject was 18 years old and a right-sided hemiparesis. CIMT is the method of the intervention that limit the movement of unaffected upper limb. This experiment was performed by using a elbow splint in this subject which was applied more than 14-hr a day for 8 weeks. Assessments were performed three conditions: baseline is no intervention, First intervention performed for 4 weeks, and second intervention performed. First intervention was performed by participating common life task with the right hand. Intensive hand activity program was provided to subject during second intervention. The ability of the ADL performance was measured by Canadian occupational performance measure (COPM) and functional independence measure (FIM). For the measurement of hand function was Jebsen-Taylor hand function test and grip dynamometer. After the 8 weeks CIMT, the result of subject's performance level of ADL and hand function were enhanced. The FIM score increased by 102 points from 88 points after 8 weeks. During intervention first intervention, writing and simulated feeding sub-items measuring time were decreased by 29.05 sec, 20.05 sec from 35.01 sec, 38.03 sec in Jebsen hand function test, however, during second intervention , turning over cards, picking up large light object, picking up large weighted object sub-items measuring time were decreased by 13.01 sec, 7.07 sec, 11.01 sec from 18.04 sec, 10.05 sec, 15 sec. Grip strength increased on right hand nearly doubled from 11kg. These findings suggest that considering handedness while CIMT performed could influence the affected hand function and performance level of ADL. It provides a helpful information for further studied in this field.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".