Minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefits for single- and dual-task timed up and go test following motor-cognitive training in Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To establish substantial clinical benefits (SCB) and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for both the single-task and dual-task timed up and go (TUG) tests in people with Parkinson's disease (PwPD). DESIGN: Prospective pre-post intervention study evaluating the effects of combined motor-cognitive training. SETTING: Rehabilitation centers. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred fifteen PwPD, with a mean age of 61.33 ± 13.01 years. INTERVENTIONS: Dual-task motor-cognitive training. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time taken to complete the single-task and dual-task TUG tests, recorded both before and after the intervention. MCIDs were calculated using the anchor-based and distribution-based methods. SCB was assessed using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: The anchor-based MCIDs for the single-task and dual-task TUG tests ranged from -0.71 to -1.27, and - 0.82 to -1.81, respectively. The distribution-based MCIDs for the single-task and dual-task TUG tests ranged from -1.07 to -1.14, and - 1.65 to -1.98, respectively. The SCB for both the single-task and dual-task TUG tests was determined to be less than -2.04. CONCLUSION: This investigation provides critical insights into interpreting changes in functional mobility in PwPD, facilitating informed clinical interventions and enhancing research planning initiatives.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".