MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Means of occupational therapy in (individual) rehabilitation programs for people with Parkinson’s disease

2021· article· en· W4206149937 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Олена Антонова, S. О. Sorokina

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent issues in pharmacy and medicine science and practice · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHuman Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationPhysical therapyOccupational therapyMassageAnamnesisCognitionMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentParkinson's diseaseDiseasePsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatryCognitive impairmentInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the work is to develop a set of rehabilitation measures including occupational therapy classes for Parkinson’s disease and to assess the objective condition of patients on the scales of non-motor symptoms, cognitive and mental disorders. Materials and methods. The study of patients was conducted on the basis of anamnesis, objective examination and scales for assessment of non-motor symptoms, cognitive and mental disorders (scale of non-motor symptoms – NMSS, scale of mental disorders – MMSE, Montreal scale of cognitive disorders – MOCA); to assess non-motor symptoms, a patient questionnaire was additionally used to identify autonomic disorders (according to A. M. Wayne, 1998). The control and experimental groups were offered exercise, physiotherapy, massage and nutrition (diet). Occupational therapy was added for the experimental group. Results. After the physical rehabilitation, the condition of the patients significantly improved. The final score in the experimental group of patients with non-motor manifestations of Parkinson’s disease on the scale of assessment of non-motor symptoms was statistically significantly lower and was 61.04 ± 0.39 (P < 0.01). The final score on the scale of mental disorders was statistically significantly higher – 27.78 ± 0.27 (P < 0.01), on the scale of cognitive changes, it also became statistically significantly higher – 25.13 ± 0.19 (P < 0.01). According to A. M. Wayne’s questionnaire of autonomic disorders, the total score in the control group was 64.0 ± 3.2. In the experimental group of patients, the total score was 51.0 ± 5.4 points (P < 0.01). Thus, under the influence of additional occupational therapy classes, in the experimental group both on the scale of non-motor symptoms and by A. M. Wayne’s, questionnaire there was a statistically significant improvement in the condition of patients. Conclusions. Based on the results of the study, it can be concluded that there is a significant difference (P < 0.01) in the condition of patients on the final scores, with the pronounced improvement in the condition of the experimental group patients in comparison with the control group patients, following the results of all survey scales. A significant difference is observed on the scale of non-motor symptoms. A certain role in improving the condition of patients with appropriate screening using study scales and a patient questionnaire to identify autonomic disorders (according to A. M. Wayne, 1998), apparently played a component of the rehabilitation program, which further included occupational therapy classes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.147
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.359 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent issues in pharmacy and medicine science and practiceSame topicHuman Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207