Effects of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy in A Case with Winchester Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of physiotherapy and occupational therapy in a case with Winchester syndrome. Material and methods: In this report, 13 years old boy with Winchester Syndrome and physical and occupational therapy approaches were presented. Kamakura’s Hand Grips Evaluation Method, Canadian Occupational Performance Measure were used to assess hand ability and performance in daily living activities. Duration of writing sentences and hand functions were assessed by Jebsen Taylor Hand Function Test. Fine motor skills were assessed by using the fine motor skills’ subtests of Bruininks- Oseretsky Motor Proficiency Test, activities of daily living by Functional Independence Measurement for children (Wee-FIM), and quality of life by Child Assessment of Health Questionnaire (CHAQ). The range of motions and posture analysis of the subject were also examined. Exercise and activity trainings that included physiotherapy and occupational therapy approaches were planned to increase physical functions and ability in motor skills and performed 3 days in a week during six months regularly. Results: The range of motions of joints, independency level in daily living activities and quality of life of the subject were improved obviously after trainings. conclusion: It is concluded that physiotherapy and occupational therapy approaches may be one of the important supportive therapeutic options for the cases with Winchester Syndrome
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".