Use of Segmental Coordination Analysis of Nonparetic and Paretic Limbs During Obstacle Clearance in Community‐Dwelling Persons After Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To use a segment coordination analysis to identify coordination differences between the paretic and nonparetic limbs for obstacle clearance in community-dwelling persons after stroke. DESIGN: Within-participant design. SETTING: Gait analysis laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Six community-dwelling persons with a stroke (excluding cerebellar stroke). METHODS: Participants stepped over obstacles of 2 different heights (7.5% and 15% of leg length), leading alternately with their paretic and nonparetic limbs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Kinematic data were collected, and segment elevation angles (absolute segment angular position with respect to vertical) were calculated for the thigh, shank, and foot segments. Established mathematical techniques related to the planar law of intersegmental coordination (principal component analysis to quantify covariance and temporal phase relationships among elevation angles) were then applied to compare and contrast the coordination of these segment elevation angle trajectories between paretic and nonparetic limbs. RESULTS: Segment covariance in elevation angles followed the planar law of intersegmental coordination during level walking (ie, 3 elevation angles that form a plane and the variance explained by 2 principal components) for both paretic and nonparetic limbs. During obstacle clearance, however, relationships between covariance plane characteristics and phase differences for elevation angles of adjacent segments differed in the nonparetic limb, likely related to a need for greater limb elevation for obstacle clearance during paretic limb support or an altered foot trajectory, which resulted from preobstacle foot placement. CONCLUSIONS: The present coordination analysis suggests the preservation of basic control mechanisms in the paretic limb during obstacle clearance after stroke and also reveals its specific motor control compensations. However, a larger study with differing levels of stroke severity must be conducted to understand how the evaluation of intersegmental coordination during walking could guide treatment of specific locomotor control deficits in stroke rehabilitation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".