Evaluation of therapy cognitive and motor functions with technical equipment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The thesis evaluates the effect of four-week home therapy using stabilometric platform Nintendo Wii Balance Board and tablet with integrated software HomeBalance in patients with brain injury. Software HomeBalance has been developed for the treatment of balance disorders and cognitive function. Manipulating the platform and the tablet may also develop grip and handling abilities of hand, both will be evaluated in this work as well. The theoretical part describes new trends in rehabilitation of cognitive-motor interference, dual-task therapy and therapy using technological equipments. Methods: A total of 9 subjects underwent four weeks of therapy using a therapeutic set HomeBalance. The control group of 12 subjects received therapy without any technological equipment. Patients participated in the initial examination, home therapy and final examination. As an evaluation of the therapy Mini-BESTest, Timed Up and Go test, Montreal cognitive assessment, 9- hole peg test, and also two games from HomeBalance software and questionnaire assessing satisfaction with therapy have been used. Results: After treatment the whole group improved in only two tests evaluated: in Mini- BESTest and the time of diagnostic scene in HomeBalance software. The research group had statistically better results in both tests...
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".