Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare turning capacity in ambulatory individuals poststroke with controls and to determine the relationship between turning capacity, functional ambulation, motor recovery, and gait asymmetry. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional experimental study using community-dwelling, ambulatory chronic stroke survivors (n = 13) and age-matched able-bodied controls (n = 10). Neural impairment resulting from stroke was assessed by the Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment for the leg and foot. Turning capacity was measured by the number of steps and time required to complete 45-, 90-, and 180-degree turns. Functional ambulation and balance were assessed by the 10-m walk test, Timed Up and Go test, Emory Functional Ambulation Profile, and the Berg Balance Scale. Gait asymmetry was measured by single-support gait asymmetry. RESULTS: Participants with stroke required a significantly greater number of steps and longer time to complete the 45-, 90-, and 180-degree turns compared with controls. The average number of steps or time required to turn 45, 90, or 180 degrees was not different whether the turns were made to the paretic side or to the nonparetic side in the participants with stroke or whether turns were made toward the dominant or nondominant side in the controls. In the participants with stroke, turning capacity for 180-degree turns to both the paretic and nonparetic side was significantly correlated to the 10-m walk test, Timed Up and Go test, Emory Functional Ambulation Profile, and Berg Balance Scale. Single-support gait asymmetry was also significantly correlated to 180-degree turning capacity. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate that turning capacity poststroke is compromised, as exemplified by the greater number of steps and time required to complete turns at each angle tested. Turning capacity was related to the degree of gait asymmetry and the level of functional ambulation. Further work is needed to elucidate the contribution of biomechanical and neurologic parameters of hemiplegic gait impairments to turning capacity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".