Subakromiyal s?k??ma sendromlu olgularda skapular stabilizasyon egzersizlerinin etkinli?i
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ama?: ?al??man?n amac??? Subakromiyal S?k??ma Sendromu (SSS) olan ki?ilerde germe ve kuvvetlendirme egzersizleri ile skapular stabilizasyon egzersizlerinin, a?r?, omuz eklem hareket geni?li?i, kas kuvveti, eklem pozisyon hissi ve ya?am kalitesi ?zerine etkinli?ini incelemektir. Gere? ve Y?ntem: ?al??ma Dokuz Eyl?l ?niversitesi T?p Fak?ltesi Uygulama ve Ara?t?rma Hastanesi Ortopedi Anabilim Dal?'na ba?vurarak SSS tan?s? alm?? olgulardan ?al??maya kabul edilme kriterlerine sahip olan 40 olgu ?zerinde yap?ld?. Kriterlere uyan t?m hastalar ba?lang?? ?l??mlerinin yap?lmas?ndan ?nce basit rasgele say?lar tablosu kullan?larak 2'ye ayr?ld?. Birinci gruba (n= 20) germe ve kuvvetlendirme egzersizleri, ikinci gruba (n=20) germe ve kuvvetlendirme egzersizlerine ilave olarak skapular stabilizasyon egzersizleri verildi. Olgular tedavi ?ncesi ve 6 haftal?k tedavi sonunda de?erlendirmeye al?nd?. De?erlendirme kapsam?nda hastalara ait demografik bilgiler, dominant ekstremite, etkilenen ekstremite, ka? ayd?r a?r?s?n?n oldu?u kar??l?kl? g?r??me sonras? verilen cevaplar?n kaydedilmesi ile elde edildi. Hastalar?n a?r? ?iddetleri, omuz eklem hareket a??kl?klar?, kassal kuvvet, eklem pozisyon hissi, lateral skapular kayma testi (LSKT), Western Ontario Rotator K?l?f ?ndeksi (WORC) ?l??mleri yap?ld?. Hastalar?n alg?lad?klar? semptom de?i?ikli?i 3 puanl?k bir ?l?ek ile de?erlendirildi. Bulgular: Olgular?n a?r? ?iddetleri, eklem hareket a??kl?klar? ve WORC indeksi sonu?lar? tedavi ?ncesinde ve tedavi sonras?nda gruplar aras?nda kar??la?t?r?ld???nda istatistiksel olarak anlaml? bir fark saptanmad? (p>0.05). Tedavi sonras? Grup 2 olgular?n?n kas kuvvetindeki artma (alt trapez, orta trapez, ?st trapez, serratus anterior ve supraspinatus kaslar?), internal rotasyon ve eksternal rotasyon eklem pozisyon hissi hata derecesindeki azalma ve ?? farkl? pozisyonda LSKT sonu?lar?ndaki azalman?n istatistiksel olarak daha fazla oldu?u bulundu (p
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.009 |
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".