Learning to cope with mirror movements in unilateral spastic cerebral palsy: a brief report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Mirror movements (MM) in unilateral spastic cerebral palsy (USCP) interfere with many bimanual activities of daily living. Methods: Here, we developed a specific bimanual therapeutic regimen, focusing on asymmetric simultaneous movements of the two hands. Twelve children (6-17 years old; complete data available in ten children) with USCP and MM were included. Results: After three weeks of inpatient rehabilitation, we observed significant improvements for two self-defined bimanual goal activities (Goal Attainment Scaling, Canadian Occupational Performance Measure) and for bimanual performance in general (Assisting Hand Assessment). These improvements were still present 6 months later. In contrast, even immediately after therapy, the severity of MM had not changed. Conclusions: Hence, targeted bimanual therapy improved bimanual performance, but did not lead to a reduction of MM. The results of this pilot study might suggest that children with MM benefit more from acquiring strategies to cope with MM than by an active training which aimed to reduce MM.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".