Torasik Çıkış Sendromlu Hastalarda Servikal Eklem Pozisyon Hissinin İncelenmesi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (TOS) is a common compressive lesion in the cervico-thoracic region. Although extremity involvement is known, cervical involvement has not been investigated. Our study was planned to evaluate the cervical joint position sense in TOS and to investigate its relationship with TOS symptoms.Method: Thirteen individuals with TOS (10 women, 3 men, age: 26±4.73) and 13 healthy individuals (11 women, 2 men, age: 25.8±4.18) were included in the study. Cervical joint position sense of all participants was measured. Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale, Toronto Alexithymia Scale, and Neck Disability Index scores of individuals with TOS were recorded. Pain intensity during activity was measured with the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the symptom duration was recorded.Results: The VAS score of patients with TOS was 5.4±2.69, and symptom duration was 5.03±2.93 years. There was no difference between the cervical joint position sense of individuals with TOS and healthy individuals (right rotation (p=0.817), left rotation (p=0.209), right lateral flexion (p=0.248) and left lateral flexion (p=0.457). The kinesiophobia of individuals with TOS was 37.69±7.9, alexithymia was 44.53±13.5, and disability score was 14.61±5.45. A positive correlation (r=0.670, p=0.012) was found between kinesiophobia and alexithymia in individuals with TOS.Conclusion: Cervical joint position sense has not affected in TOS patients. The results need to be evaluated in a larger sample size. The relationship between alexithymia and kinesiophobia may be the result of a long symptom duration. We think that detailed studies on chronic pain in patients with TOS are needed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".