Augmenting Hand and Arm Function for Persons with Hemiparesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Hand and arm dysfunction due to neural disorders significantly influences quality of life. Activity-based training has been found to improve function. These improvements could be augmented with transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) due to the modulatory effect it has on spinal and supraspinal networks. Objective. The primary aim is to determine if a 4-week training program will improve hand and arm function. The secondary aim is to determine if the addition of tSCS to a second 4-week training session will further improve function. Design. This is a pre-posttest, controlled trial for persons 10-75 years of age, >6 months post stroke or with unilateral cerebral palsy.Methods. Participants will engage in two 4-week training periods, 3x/week for 2 hours/day. The 1st period will include unimanual and bimanual training alone. The 2nd period will be augmented with low frequency tSCS to the C5-T1 spinal region. Stimulation intensity will be based on individual muscle activation during 3 tasks: 1) grip dynamometry; 2) grip-lift; and 3) target pointing. Outcome measures taken before, midway, and after training are: Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), dexterity, daylong arm use, grip/pinch strength, sensibility, questionnaires, bilateral hand/arm surface electromyography, and Upper Extremity Fugl-Meyer (UEFM). Results: Nine participants have completed the 1st 4-week training period without tSCS. Individual data reveals improvements in the COPM, Grip strength, dexterity, and the UEFM. Findings for other measures after the 1st period are mixed or in process. Conclusion: Preliminary findings from this ongoing study reveal that participants made improvements in most measures. The next phase of the study will determine if the addition of tSCS to training further augments hand and arm function.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".