Acute Intermittent Hypoxia in People Living With Chronic Stroke: A Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acute intermittent hypoxia (AIH) is a novel therapeutic intervention that facilitates recovery of function, but the tolerability and effectiveness have not been tested in people living with chronic stroke. The purpose here was to examine whether AIH is tolerable and effective in this population. METHODS: Ten participants with a unilateral, hemispheric stroke were assessed before and after 4 sessions of AIH separated by ≥48 hours in a case series at Shirley Ryan AbilityLab (Chicago). Physician-assessed signs and symptoms (assessed via: repeated symptom reviews, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, cranial nerve assessment, a muscle strength test, the Brunnstrom scale, sensory changes, reflexes, assessment of heart and lung status, Fugl-Meyer test, Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment, Modified Ashworth Scale for Spasticity, and Delis Kaplan Executive Function System Color-Word Interference Test) and bilateral upper limb strength (grip and elbow flexion) were assessed before, ≈15 to 30 minutes, and ≈60 minutes after the intervention. RESULTS: AIH was well-tolerated and there were no adverse events observed. After AIH, grip strength (12.91% and 16.53% improvement at 30 and 60 minutes post-AIH, respectively) and elbow flexion force (5.87% and 7.01% improvement at 30 and 60 minutes post-AIH, respectively) improved in the more-affected limb. CONCLUSIONS: AIH is potentially safe and effective for improving strength in the more-affected limb in people living with hemiparetic stroke. Future work should explore the use of AIH to enhance task-specific training-induced plasticity. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04019522.
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".