Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To assess the clinical effectiveness of a comprehensive rehabilitation program for patients with Parkinson’s disease Materials and Methods: The study was conducted in the regional center for movement disorders (Odesa, Ukraine). 90 patients with 1-2.5 Hoehn-Yahr stage were examined. Patients were randomly assigned to three groups (I (n=30) – standard drug therapy, II (n=30) – standard drug therapy +physical therapy, III (n=30) – standard drug therapy +physical therapy+ art therapy). The effectiveness of the therapy was assessed using the UPDRS questionnaires, Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Pegboard Test. The follow-up period was 12 months. Results: Patients of the II and III groups noted an improvement in mood after physical exertion. They observed a decrease in daytime sleepiness, a decrease in tremors, and a decrease in the intensity of anxiety and fear. During the observation period, signs of disease progression were observed only in 4 (13.3%) patients of group II, in 2 (6.7%) patients of group III and in 12 (40.0%) ) patients of the control group (respectively, χ2 = 4.18 p = 0.04 and χ2 = 7.55 p = 0.006) Conclusions: 1. The use of complex rehabilitation allows to reduce the severity of motor and non-motor manifestations of Parkinson's disease. 2. The inclusion of art therapy in the complex rehabilitation program allows to halve the number of cases of disease progression. 3. The positive effect of the use of comprehensive rehabilitation is maintained throughout the observation period.
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".