MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386247174 · doi:10.1167/jov.23.9.4775

Assessment and recovery of visually guided reaching following cerebellar stroke.

2023· article· en· W4386247174 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christopher L. Striemer, Chella M. Robles, Britt Andeson, Sean P. Dukelow

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMacEwan UniversityUniversity of CalgaryWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebellumPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyStroke (engine)Motor coordinationMotor learningAudiologyMotor controlMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cerebellum is known to play an important role in the coordination and timing of limb movements. The present study focused on how reach kinematics are affected by cerebellar lesions to quantify both the presence of motor impairment, and recovery of motor function over time. In the current study, 13 patients with isolated cerebellar stroke completed clinical measures of cognitive and motor function, as well as a visually guided reaching (VGR) task using the KINARM exoskeleton at baseline (~2 weeks), as well as 6, 12, and 24-weeks post-stroke. During the VGR task, patients made unassisted reaches with visual feedback from a central ‘start’ position to one of eight targets arranged in a circle at a distance of 10cm. At baseline, 7/13 patients were impaired across several parameters of the VGR task compared to a Kinarm normative sample (n=307), revealing deficits in both feed-forward and feedback control. The only clinical measures that consistently demonstrated impairment were the Purdue Pegboard Task (PPT) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Overall, patients who were impaired at baseline showed significant recovery by the 24-week follow-up for both VGR and the PPT. A lesion overlap analysis indicated that the regions mostly commonly damaged in 5/13 patients (38% overlap) were lobule HIX and Crus II of the right cerebellum. Our results are consistent with previous work indicating that the cerebellum is involved in both feedforward and feedback control during reaching, and that cerebellar patients tend to recover relatively quickly overall. Notably, baseline PPT scores predicted only 33% of the variance in VGR task performance. This suggests that objective kinematic measures may provide a more complete picture of overall motor impairment than clinical measures alone. These additional kinematic data could be helpful in monitoring the assessment and recovery of motor function in patients with cerebellar stroke with greater precision.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vision→Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→