Parkinson Hastalarında Alt ve Üst Ekstremite Becerilerinin Çift Görev ile Değişiminin İncelenmesi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study planned with the aim of to compare dual task upper and lower extremity skills with single taskupper and lower extremity skills and to investigate the effect of the dual task on upper and lower extremity skills in Parkinson's disease patients with different stages of disease. 15 patients with Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA) score 21 or above, between 62-68 ages, in stage 1-2 (mild stage) according to the Modified Hoehn &Yahr Scale and 15 patients with Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA) score 21 or above, between 64-72 ages in stage 2,5-3 (moderate stage) according to the Modified Hoehn &Yahr Scale and 15 age matched healthy controls were included in the study. The demographic data of the patients were recorded and assessments were made while the patients were in the "on" period. Walking speed was assessed with 10-Meter Walk Test (10MWT), functional mobility skills was assessed with Timed Up and Go Test (TUG) and manual dexterity was assessed with Purdue Pegboard Test (PPT). These assessments were made during single task and dual task. Quality of life was assessed with Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-8 (PDQ-8) for Parkinson's disease patients and with the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) for the healthy control group. In this study, it was determined that the dual task has a negative effect on upper and lower extremity skills and this negative effect was observed earlier and was heavier in upper extremities than lower extremities (p<0.05). It was also found that the quality of life of Parkinson's disease patients was affected from the early stages and was associated with dual tasks effect (10MWT; rho=0.492, p=0.006), TUG; rho=0.672, p<0.001, PPT; rho=-0.682, p<0.01). The effect of the dual task on the upper extremities that begins in the early stages of the disease, revealed the necessity of early initiation of the exercises intended to upper extremities in treatment programs and it was thought that this early initiation will increase the success of the treatment and also will increase the quality of life of the patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".