Examining Gait Patterns after Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Parameterization and Principal Component Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of parameterization in assessing gait waveforms has been widely accepted, although it is recognized that this approach excludes the majority of information contained in the waveform. Waveform analysis techniques, such as principal component analysis (PCA), have gained popularity in recent years as a more effective approach to extracting important information from human movement waveforms, but are more challenging to interpret. Few studies have compared these two different approaches to determine which yields the most relevant information. This study compared the kinematic patterns during gait of six total knee arthroplasty (TKA) subjects (10 TKA knees), to a group of 10 age-matched asymptomatic control subjects (19 control knees). An eight-camera Vicon M-cam system was used to track movement and compute joint angles. Group differences in parameterization (max and min peaks) values and principal component scores were tested using one-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Using parameterization, the TKA group was characterized by reduced hip extension, increased hip flexion, increased anterior pelvic tilt, increased trunk tilt, and reduced sagittal ankle angles compared to the control group. Waveform analysis, by means of PCA, showed-magnitude shifts in sagittal ankle waveforms between groups, rather than solely reporting differences in peaks. Waveform analysis also indicated a significant shift in the magnitude of the entire waveform for hip angles, pelvic tilt, and trunk tilt, indicating no change in range of motion between groups, but rather a change in the way in which range of motion is achieved at the hip. This study has identified several gait variables that were significantly different between the TKA and control groups. Our results suggest that waveform analysis is effective at identifying magnitude shifts as sources of variability between groups, which would not necessarily be analyzed using conventional parameterization techniques unless one knew a priori where the variability would exist.
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 | 0.002 | 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".