The puzzle of RehbeCa: an exergame for assessing cervicalgia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Neck range of motion (ROM) and pain assessment are crucial aspects of cervical examination. The goal is to match a patient’s clinical presentation with an appropriate treatment. We developed and evaluated a mobile puzzle-based exergame for assessing cervicalgia. An exploratory experiment with healthy participants and simulated neck mobility restrictions investigated the relationship between task performance and neck ROM. Insights from this phase led to refinement of the experimental design and apparatus. In a subsequent experiment, the exergame was tested on participants with neck pain to analyze how their neck ROM and pain condition affect task performance. Results indicate that participants suffering from neck pain maintained similar task performance metrics, such as selection rate, but exhibited greater variability in ROM, reflecting their adaptation to pain and mobility limitations. Results also indicate that pain condition significantly influences completion time: Participants with neck pain took longer to complete puzzles than participants with no pain. In the last stage, the data from both experiments were used to feed a machine learning model to test the automatic prediction of cervicalgia assessment parameters. This work advances rehabilitation technologies by integrating tools to automatically adapt and combine exercise and parameters of cervical rehabilitation enabling functional assessment without needing external sensors, distinguishing it from many existing approaches. The system is not only a rehabilitation tool, but also a method for evaluating cervical pain and mobility based on user interaction data.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".