MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Feasibility of a standardized protocol for respiratory training with intermitted positive pressure breathing ventilator application in dysphonia and dysarthria

2021· article· en· W3206181087 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDysarthriaRespiratory systemIntermittent positive pressure breathingBreathingProtocol (science)Rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Brain damage can affect several functions related to speech production leading to dysphonia and dysarthria. Most rehabilitation treatments focus on articulation training rather than on pneumophonic coordination and respiratory muscle strength. Respiratory training using an intermitted positive pressure breathing (IPPB) ventilator can be used for this last purpose; no agreement on a standard protocol has been reached to date. AIM: To evaluate the feasibility and the effectiveness of a standardized incremental protocol of respiratory training using IPPB to treat dysphonia and dysarthria. DESIGN: Case series study. SETTING: Neuropsychological Rehabilitation Unit in an Italian Neurorehabilitation Division. POPULATION: Thirty-two subjects with dysphonia and dysarthria resulting from neurological lesion. METHODS: Participants were assessed using clinical evaluation scales (GIRBAS scale of dysphonia, Robertson dysarthria profile), respiratory function test, and arterial blood gas analysis in air. The evaluations were performed at baseline and after 20 sessions of respiratory training with IPPB. The protocol provided a default increment of ventilator parameters. All subjects also underwent a standard speech and language therapy treatment. A satisfaction survey to assess acceptability and the Goal Attainment Scale were applied. RESULTS: All participants fulfilled the protocol. No complications or discomfort were reported. Subjects' satisfaction at survey was 97.7%. After respiratory training, all respiratory function parameters increased, but only maximal voluntary ventilation (MVV), maximum inspiratory pressure (MIP), and maximum expiratory pressure (MEP) were statistically significant (P<0.05). Clinical evaluation scales significantly improved (P<0.05). Correlation between respiratory function parameters and clinical evaluation scales showed a moderate correlation between MVV, MEP, MIP, and Robertson dysarthria profile (P<0.01). A weak correlation was found between MIP, MVV, and GIRBAS scale (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our protocol showed to be practical and well-tolerated. After respiratory training, MVV, MIP and MEP improved in significantly. Clinical scale scores improved in all participants. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Respiratory training using IPPB ventilator can be useful in implementing speech and language treatments in subjects with dysphonia and dysarthria linked to brain injury.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation MedicineSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207