A high dose tango intervention for people with Parkinson's disease (PwPD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parkinson's disease (PD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder for which there is no cure. Exercise-based programs are customarily suggested to address motor and non-motor impairments. Dance has been used to supplement ongoing therapies for people with PD, usually on a weekly or biweekly basis proving to be a feasible option for neurorehabilitation. A daily dose of dance, however, may also be feasible -as indicated by previous studies- suggesting to provide careful attention to the question of dose in efficacy. This study examines the dose effect of daily dance for people with PD on motor and non-motor functions directly within a movement disorders clinic. Within-subject, pre-post-intervention, mixed-methods evaluation including the Movement Disorders Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale part III (MDS-UPDRS III). Eight people with mild and moderate severity idiopathic Parkinson's disease participated in the study consisting in ten dance lessons, each 90-minutes daily within a two-week period. All subjects were paired with expert tango dancers. The Movement Disorders Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale part III was used for pre- and post-motor assessment. A Likert Scale and Exit Interviews were conducted to assess the impact of the dance intervention on participants' experience. Our study found a significant 18% amelioration in motor symptoms as measured by the MDS-UPDRS III in the pre and post-dance intervention (P < 0.05). It also found improvements on activities of daily living, sleep, confidence and relatedness - post high dose dance intervention in Likert Scale ratings. A high dose short-term tango intervention for people with PD improved motor and non-motor aspects of PD with high levels of adherence (97.5%). The frequency or dosage of dance in neurorehabilitation suggests that a high dose (5 times per week) can ameliorate motor symptoms of PD and could be used as a short-term intervention.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".