Evaluation of therapeutic electrical stimulation to improve muscle strength and function in children with types II/III spinal muscular atrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study aimed to evaluate the effect of low‐intensity nighttime therapeutic electrical stimulation (TES) on arm strength and function in children with intermediate type spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). The design was a randomized controlled trial with a 6‐month baseline control period. Children were evaluated at baseline, 6, and 12 months. TES was applied from 6 to 12 months to the deltoid and biceps muscle, of a randomly selected arm with the opposite arm receiving a placebo stimulator. Thirteen individuals with SMA between 5 to 19 years of age were recruited into the study and eight completed the 12‐month assessment. No statistically significant differences between the treatment and control arm were found at baseline, 6, and 12 months for elbow flexors, or shoulder abductors on quantitative myometry or manual muscle testing. There was no significant change in excitable muscle mass assessed by M‐wave amplitudes, nor function on the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (self‐care domain). Therefore, in this study there was no evidence that TES improved strength in children with SMA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".