Telemedicine‐enabled biofeedback electropalatography rehabilitation (TEBER): A pilot study for patients treated with surgery for oral cavity carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To address the rehabilitative barriers to frequency and precision of care, we conducted a pilot study of a biofeedback electropalatography (EPG) device paired with telemedicine for patients who underwent primary surgery +/- adjuvant radiation for oral cavity carcinoma. We hypothesized that lingual optimization followed by telemedicine-enabled biofeedback electropalatography rehabilitation (TEBER) would further improve speech and swallowing outcomes after "standard-of-care" SOC rehabilitation. METHOD: Pilot prospective 8-week (TEBER) program following 8 weeks of (SOC) rehabilitation. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were included and 11 completed the protocol. When examining the benefit of TEBER independent of standard of care, "range-of-liquids" improved by +0.36 [95% CI, 0.02-0.70, p = 0.05] and "range-of-solids" improved by +0.73 [95% CI, 0.12-1.34, p = 0.03]. There was a positive trend toward better oral cavity obliteration; residual volume decreased by -1.2 [95% CI, -2.45 to 0.053, p = 0.06], and "nutritional-mode" increased by +0.55 [95% CI, -0.15 to 1.24, p = 0.08]. CONCLUSION: This pilot suggests that TEBER bolsters oral rehabilitation after 8 weeks of SOC lingual range of motion.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".