Sex-specific age associations of ankle proprioception test performance in older adults: results from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: this study was aimed to test the hypothesis that ankle proprioception assessed by custom-designed proprioception testing equipment changes with ageing in men and women. METHODS: ankle proprioception was assessed in 289 participants (131 women) of the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (BLSA); the participants aged 51-95 years and were blinded during testing. RESULTS: the average minimum perceived ankle rotation was 1.11° (SE = 0.07) in women and 1.00° (SE = 0.06) in men, and it increased with ageing in both sexes (P < 0.001, for both). Ankle tracking performance, which is the ability to closely follow with the left ankle, a rotational movement induced on the right ankle by a torque motor, declines with ageing in both men and women (P = 0.018 and P = 0.011, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: a simple, standardised method for assessing ankle proprioception was introduced in this study using a customized test instrument, software and test protocol. Age-associated reduction in ankle proprioception was confirmed from two subtests of threshold and tracking separately for women and men. Findings in this study prompt future studies to determine whether these age-associated differences in the threshold for passive motion detection and movement tracking are evident in longitudinal study and how these specific deficits in ankle proprioception are related to age-associated chronic conditions such as knee or hip osteoarthritis and type II diabetes and affect daily activities such as gait.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".