Leg muscle strength is reduced in Parkinson's disease and relates to the ability to rise from a chair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals with Parkinson's disease (PD) have difficulties rising from a chair; however, factors contributing to this inability have never been investigated. We compared lower extremity strength between individuals with PD and healthy controls and quantified the relationships between strength and the ability to rise from a chair. Ten men with mild PD and 10 sex- and age-matched controls performed maximal concentric, isokinetic knee and hip extensor torque on an isokinetic dynamometer to quantify muscle strength. Subjects also rose from a chair at their comfortable pace without the use of their arms and the duration of this task provided a measure of sit-to-stand (STS) ability. Subjects with PD were tested in an on- and off-medication state on different days. Mean hip and knee extensor torques were lower in subjects with PD, with greater deficits found at the hip. Greater hip strength was related to better STS ability in subjects with PD while greater knee strength was related to better STS ability in controls. These results show that individuals with mild PD generate smaller extremity forces compared to controls. Reduced strength, particularly at the hip, may be one factor that contributes to the difficulty of persons with PD to rise from a chair.
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) | 0.001 | 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".