MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414184023 · doi:10.7759/cureus.92341

Sustained Bulbar and Respiratory Function in a Case Most Consistent With Bulbar-Onset Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Following Axial Spinal Traction: A 21-Month Report

2025· article· en· W4414184023 on OpenAlexaff
Huanwei Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Chiropractic Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisRespiratory systemRiluzolePresentation (obstetrics)Respiratory failureDiseaseCase presentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bulbar-onset amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a rapidly progressive neurodegenerative disease characterized by early decline in speech, swallowing, and respiratory function, and is associated with a poor prognosis. We report the case of a woman whose treating neurologist determined, eight months after symptom onset, that her presentation was most consistent with bulbar-onset ALS. At 16 months, she began receiving intermittent pelvis-stabilized axial spinal traction (PSAST) as a supportive intervention. Remarkably, over the subsequent 21 months, she maintained oral intake and preserved respiratory function, an outcome atypical of the expected trajectory of bulbar-onset ALS. While this single case relies on provider reports for diagnostic confirmation, it raises the hypothesis that axial spinal traction may help sustain bulbar and respiratory function in ALS. Given the lack of effective treatment options, we present this case to raise awareness of a potential supportive approach that warrants further investigation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ResearchFrench-language works237,207