MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092109620 · doi:10.1159/000076773

Does Practice Modify the Relationship between Postural Control and the Execution of a Secondary Task in Young and Older Individuals?

2004· article· en· W2092109620 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGerontology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooCanadian Institutes of Health Research
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTask (project management)PsychologyNoveltyYoung adultConversationDevelopmental psychologyActivities of daily livingPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineSocial psychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Numerous daily activities require performing more than one task simultaneously, such as standing while engaging in a conversation. Recent studies have shown that postural control may be degraded when individuals are asked to perform a secondary task and that this effect seems to be more pronounced in older adults. Since various types of secondary tasks have been used in postural control studies, the novelty of the tasks may partly explain why dual-task interference occurs. It is known that novel tasks require greater attentional resources and thus may interfere to a greater extent with the performance of another task. Therefore, by practicing this dual-task situation, interference could perhaps be diminished. Since the dual-tasking efficiency is reduced with aging, practice could be very beneficial to older adults. OBJECTIVES: The main goal of this study was to examine whether practice could modify the changes seen in postural sway when individuals are asked to perform a secondary task while maintaining upright stance and whether older individuals could benefit to a greater extent from practice than would young individuals. The second goal was to examine the dual-task performance in young versus older adults and to determine whether older individuals benefit equally or to a greater extent from practice as compared with young individuals. METHODS: Young and older individuals were asked to stand on a force platform while performing a secondary task or no task. The secondary task condition was repeated six times to examine the effects of practice. RESULTS: Practice did not modify the performance of postural sway, but did lead to an increase in speed of execution of the secondary task for both groups equally. In young participants, the amplitude of sway was decreased, and the frequency of sway was increased, indicating an increased stiffness when performing the cognitive task. Older participants showed increased amplitude of sway and increased frequency of sway in the mediolateral direction only. CONCLUSIONS: Since the dual-task condition was only repeated six times, it could be hypothesized that the effect of practice would be greater, if more trials were added or if more practice sessions were included. More research is needed to verify this hypothesis.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it