Effects of fast head turns on head, trunk and pelvis motions during standing and walking in patients with unilateral vestibular deficit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with unilateral vestibular deficit (UVD) report difficulties with maintaining balance while executing fast head turns. Our aim was to determine whether head, trunk, and pelvis angular displacements were symmetrical in patients with UVD as they executed voluntary yaw rotation of the head towards or away from the side of the vestibular lesion, during standing and walking. Eight patients who underwent surgical resection of an acoustic neuroma stood with feet together or walked at comfortable pace across a 10-meter walkway. They turned the head as quickly and as fast as possible in the direction indicated by an illuminating arrow (left, right or none). The head angular displacement was similar towards the affected and intact sides. Acceleration tended to be larger during head rotations towards the affected versus the intact side by 13% at the head, 42% at the trunk and 37% at the pelvis (p> 0.05, NS). The pelvis rotated opposite to the head in 65% of trials towards the affected side and 56% of the trials towards the intact side during standing and 81% and 69%, respectively during walking. Overall, the UVD had only a minor influence on the symmetry of head, trunk and pelvis kinematics during fast yaw rotation of the head executed during standing and walking.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".