P.072 Effects of self-directed exercise on strength in Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease subtypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Preliminary studies have supported the utility of exercise as a treatment for Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease (CMT) patients. Despite being the most common inherited neuropathy, there remains a paucity of guidelines for CMT management. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on 297 CMT patients. Self-reported exercise and strength results from standardized dynamometer testing were obtained from adult patients’ first visits. Values were converted and analyzed based on previously reported age and sex matched normative values. Results: Participants with CMT2 were stronger than CMT1 in hand grip, elbow flexion, and dorsiflexion (p<0.05). CMT1A participants were weaker than those with CMT1B/D. Participants with CMT1 and CMT2 who exercised were statistically significantly stronger in elbow flexion and dorsiflexion than those who did not exercise. Conclusions: These preliminary results suggest that self-directed exercise is associated with greater strength in patients with CMT. Furthermore, they support the evidence that the dysmyelinating process in CMT1 may lead to greater loss of strength compared to the axonal degeneration in CMT2, and that exercise may benefit both subtypes. Self-directed exercise may be a convenient, sustainable, and effective method of improving strength and decreasing disability in these individuals. Future research should explore the type of exercise prescription that best addresses the needs of the CMT population.
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 | 0.003 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".