Oxygen Cost of Walking in Persons with Multiple Sclerosis: Disability Matters, but Why?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. The oxygen cost (O2 cost) of walking is elevated in persons with MS, particularly as a function of increasing disability status. Objective. The current study examined symptomatic (i.e., fatigue, pain, anxiety, and depression) and gait (i.e., velocity, cadence, and step length) variables that might explain why disability status is associated with O2 cost of walking in persons with MS. Materials and Methods. 82 participants completed the Patient-Determined Disease Steps, Fatigue Severity Scale, McGill Pain Questionnaire, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and undertook 2 trials of walking on a GAITRite electronic walkway. Participants then completed a six-minute walk test with concurrent assessment of expired gases for quantifying oxygen consumption and O2 cost of walking. Results. Disability (r = 0.55) as well as fatigue (r = 0.22), gait velocity (r = -0.62), cadence (r = -0.73), and step length (r = -0.53) were associated with the O2 cost of walking. Cadence (β = -0.67), but not step length (β = -0.14) or fatigue (β = -0.10), explained the association between disability and the O2 cost of walking. Conclusions. These results highlight cadence as a target of rehabilitation for increasing metabolic efficiency during walking among those with MS, particularly as a function of worsening disability.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".