Validity of Robot-based Assessments of Upper Extremity Function

Objective To examine the validity of 5 robot-based assessments of arm motor function post-stroke. Design Cross sectional. Setting Outpatient clinical research center. Participants Volunteer sample of 40 participants, age \u3e18 years, 3-6 months post-stroke, with arm motor deficits that had plateaued. Intervention None. Main Outcome Measures Clinical standards included the Fugl-Meyer Arm Motor Scale (FMA), and 5 secondary motor outcomes: hand/wrist subsection of the FMA; Action Research Arm Test (ART); Box & Blocks test (B/B); hand subscale of Stroke Impact Scale-2 (SIS); and the Barthel Index (BI). Robot-based assessments included: wrist targeting; finger targeting; finger movement speed; reaction time; and a robotic version of the (B/B) test. Anatomical measures included percentage injury to the corticospinal tract (CST) and primary motor cortex (M1, hand region) obtained from MRI . Results Subjects had moderate-severe impairment (arm FMA scores = 35.6±14.4, range 13.5-60). Performance on the robot-based tests, including speed (r=0.82, p\u3c0.0001), wrist targeting (r=0.72, p\u3c0.0001), and finger targeting (r=0.67, p\u3c0.0001) correlated significantly with the FMA scores. Wrist targeting (r=0.57 - 0.82) and finger targeting (r=0.49 - 0.68) correlated significantly with all 5 secondary motor outcomes and with percent CST injury. The robotic version of the B/B correlated significantly with the clinical B/B test but was less prone to floor effect. Robot-based assessments were comparable to FMA score in relation to percent CST injury and superior in relation to M1 hand injury. Conclusions The current findings support using a battery of robot-based methods for assessing the upper extremity motor function in subjects with chronic stroke

Writing in Britain and Ireland, c. 400 to c. 800

No abstract available

Russia’s Legal Transitions: Marxist Theory, Neoclassical Economics and the Rule of Law

We review the role of economic theory in shaping the process of legal change in Russia during the two transitions it experienced during the course of the twentieth century: the transition to a socialist economy organised along the lines of state ownership of the means of production in the 1920s, and the transition to a market economy which occurred after the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990s. Despite differences in methodology and in policy implications, Marxist theory, dominant in the 1920s, and neoclassical economics, dominant in the 1990s, offered a similarly reductive account of law as subservient to wider economic forces. In both cases, the subordinate place accorded to law undermined the transition process. Although path dependence and history are frequently invoked to explain the limited development of the rule of law in Russia during the 1990s, policy choices driven by a deterministic conception of law and economics also played a role.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40803-015-0012-

Celebrating 20 Years of APO

For 20 years APO has been supporting better outcomes via evidence-informed policy and decision-making by making policy and research accessible and useable. However, lived experience and research evidence is all too often left out of the formation of public policy. A new Federal Government in Australia presents a new opportunity to make the policymaking process more inclusive, democratic, and evidence-informed. Led by Professor Peter Shergold AC, the panel will bring their unique perspective on how this can be achieved