Застосування ерготерапії у програмі фізичної реабілітації пацієнтів із хворобою Паркінсона
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the work is to develop a set of rehabilitation measures including occupational therapy classes for Parkinson’s disease and to assess the objective condition of patients on the scales of non-motor symptoms, cognitive and mental disorders. Materials and methods. The study of patients was conducted on the basis of anamnesis, objective examination and scales for assessment of non-motor symptoms, cognitive and mental disorders (scale of non-motor symptoms – NMSS, scale of mental disorders – MMSE, Montreal scale of cognitive disorders – MOCA); to assess non-motor symptoms, a patient questionnaire was additionally used to identify autonomic disorders (according to A. M. Wayne, 1998). The control and experimental groups were offered exercise, physiotherapy, massage and nutrition (diet). Occupational therapy was added for the experimental group. Results. After the physical rehabilitation, the condition of the patients significantly improved. The final score in the experimental group of patients with non-motor manifestations of Parkinson’s disease on the scale of assessment of non-motor symptoms was statistically significantly lower and was 61.04 ± 0.39 (P < 0.01). The final score on the scale of mental disorders was statistically significantly higher – 27.78 ± 0.27 (P < 0.01), on the scale of cognitive changes, it also became statistically significantly higher – 25.13 ± 0.19 (P < 0.01). According to A. M. Wayne’s questionnaire of autonomic disorders, the total score in the control group was 64.0 ± 3.2. In the experimental group of patients, the total score was 51.0 ± 5.4 points (P < 0.01). Thus, under the influence of additional occupational therapy classes, in the experimental group both on the scale of non-motor symptoms and by A. M. Wayne’s, questionnaire there was a statistically significant improvement in the condition of patients. Conclusions. Based on the results of the study, it can be concluded that there is a significant difference (P < 0.01) in the condition of patients on the final scores, with the pronounced improvement in the condition of the experimental group patients in comparison with the control group patients, following the results of all survey scales. A significant difference is observed on the scale of non-motor symptoms. A certain role in improving the condition of patients with appropriate screening using study scales and a patient questionnaire to identify autonomic disorders (according to A. M. Wayne, 1998), apparently played a component of the rehabilitation program, which further included occupational therapy classes.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.010 |
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".