1,721,076 research outputs found
The effects of early rheumatoid arthritis on dominant and non-dominant hand impairment and function
No full text Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is defined as a symmetrical disease yet there is evidence that hand joint damage sustained in RA is related to use, and hand dominance could affect the degree of structural impairment evident in the wrist and hand. This exploratory research aimed to examine the relationship of dominant and non-dominant wrist and hand joint impairment and function in an early rheumatoid population. A multi-centre cohort study was conducted, recruiting consenting patients with early rheumatoid arthritis from eight outpatient occupational therapy departments. Wrist and hand joint impairment and function were assessed by measuring joint pain and swelling, range of motion and joint deviation, handgrip and hand dexterity. The results demonstrated that the non-dominant hand showed less pathological structural and functional involvement than the dominant hand in all but one outcome measure. These differences reached statistical significance between dominant and non-dominant hands on active range of motion in the wrist and some digits. Dominant hand structural impairment and dysfunction in this early RA sample was consistently greater than the non-dominant hand and bilateral handgrip ratio did not reflect healthy values for norms. Individuals with early RA showed a greater level of impairment in their dominant hands. </jats:p
Responsiveness of self-reported and therapist-rated upper extremity structural impairment and functional outcome measures in early rheumatoid arthritis
No full textObjective: to provide a responsiveness analysis of the self-report and therapist-rated upper extremity functional outcome measures used in a rehabilitation trial. Methods: a variety of commonly used therapist-assessed and self-report structural impairment and functional outcome measures were compared for the ability to detect and measure change in wrist and hand status in an early rheumatoid arthritis population over 12 months. Responsiveness was measured using the standardized response mean (SRM) and effect size (ES). Results: the most responsive measures were the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (SRM 0.49 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.27, 0.72], ES = 0.37 [95% CI 0.21, 0.54]), dominant metacarpophalangeal joint ulnar deviation (SRM 0.46 [95% CI 0.27, 0.65], ES = 0.58 [95% CI 0.34, 0.82]), and mean power handgrip test (SRM 0.45 [95% CI 0.26, 0.64], ES = 0.32 [95% CI 0.18, 0.45]) The least responsive measure was the Health Assessment Questionnaire (SRM -0.12 [95% CI -0.31, 0.08], ES = -0.08 [95% CI -0.21, 0.05]). Conclusion: over 12 months, there was substantial variation in wrist and hand outcome measures to detect change over time in an early RA population. Careful consideration is required to choose the most appropriate measure that can detect change
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Rheumatology occupational therapists' views of participating in a randomised controlled trial of arthritis gloves
No full textPerceptions of arthritis glove wear of patients with rheumatoid arthritis and persistent hand pain: A nested questionnaire study within the A‐Gloves trial
No full textIntroduction: Arthritis gloves are prescribed in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to reduce hand pain, stiffness, and improve hand function. As part of a randomised controlled trial, this study investigated participants' perceptions of wearing arthritis gloves. Method: Participants with RA and persistent hand pain (n = 206) were randomly assigned and prescribed either loose-fitting gloves (control) or arthritis gloves (intervention), for day and/or night wear (as per individual need). At 12-weeks, the trial follow-up questionnaire also included items about whether the gloves prescribed were: beneficial or not; if yes, the benefits experienced; any problems encountered; if they stopped wearing gloves day and/or night, and why. Results: The questionnaire response rate was 154/206 (75%). In both groups, 73% reported gloves were beneficial (p = 0.97). There were no differences in types of benefits reported. The most common were: warmth (59% control: 54% intervention; p = 0.53); and comfort (54%: 62%; p = 0.29). Fewer reported problems with glove wear in the control group (33%), compared to the intervention group (49%); p = 0.05. In both groups, the most common daytime problem was inability to wear gloves for wet or dirty activities; and at night, gloves being too hot. Similar numbers in the control and intervention groups stopped wearing gloves either day or night (23%: 31%; p = 0.26), primarily for these reasons. Discussion: Participants' perceptions about wearing arthritis or loose-fitting gloves were very similar. Wearing ordinary gloves could result in similar perceived benefits to arthritis gloves.</p
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
