MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133067712

Therapeutic Instrumental Music Training and Sensory-enhanced Motor Imagery in Chronic Post-stroke Upper-extremity Rehabilitation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2021· dissertation· W7133067712 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Margaret Haire

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2021
Typedissertation
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsCanadian University Music Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialMotor imageryRehabilitationPsychological interventionAffect (linguistics)Sensation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: To investigate the effectiveness of Therapeutic Instrumental Music Performance (TIMP) training, with or without motor imagery, in upper-extremity rehabilitation for individuals with chronic, post-stroke hemiparesis. Secondary objectives investigate effects of interventions on cognition and affect. Methods: Two baseline assessments, a minimum of one week apart; one final assessment. Nine interventions (3x/wk for 3 wks), facilitated by a qualified Neurologic Music Therapist. Thirty participants were randomized to one of three groups: 45 minutes of active TIMP; 30 minutes of TIMP followed by 15 minutes of metronome-cued motor imagery (TIMP+cMI); 30 minutes of TIMP followed by 15 minutes of motor imagery without cues (TIMP+MI). A selection of acoustic and electronic instruments was used. Results: Thirty participants completed the protocol, ten per arm [14 women; mean age= 55.9; mean time post-stroke= 66.9 months]. Pooled group baseline measures did not significantly differ. There were significant improvements from pre-test 2 to post-test for all groups on the Fugl-Meyer-Upper Extremity (FM-UE) and the Wolf Motor Function Test-Functional Ability Scale (WMFT-FAS), and for TIMP and TIMP+MI on the Motor Activity Log (MAL)-Amount of Use Scale. Comparing percent change differences between groups, TIMP (mean rank = 21.05) scored significantly higher than TIMP+cMI (mean rank = 11.00, p = .032) on the FM-UE. There were no significant percentage change differences between TIMP and TIMP+MI. The TIMP+MI group showed a significant change on the Trail Making Test (TMT)–Part B. The TIMP group showed a significant increase on the Multiple Affect Adjective Checklist (MAACL) Sensation Seeking scale and the Valence and Dominance portions of the Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM); TIMP+cMI showed respective increases and decreases in positive and negative affect on the MAACL, as well as an increase in Valence, Dominance, and Arousal portions of the SAM. There was no statistically significant association between cognitive and affective measures. Conclusions: Implementation of TIMP-based techniques led to significant improvements in paretic arm control. TIMP and TIMP+MI showed greater benefits than TIMP+cMI, suggesting that synchronizing internal and external cues during cMI may pose additional sensory integration challenges. TIMP+MI appeared to increase mental flexibility, while active TIMP interventions appeared to enhance positive affect. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials NCT03246217

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→