Idiopathic toe-walking in children, adolescents and young adults: a matter of local or generalised stiffness?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Idiopathic Toe Walking (ITW) is present in children older than 3 years of age still walking on their toes without signs of neurological, orthopaedic or psychiatric diseases. ITW has been estimated to occur in 7% to 24% of the childhood population. To study associations between Idiopathic Toe Walking (ITW) and decrease in range of joint motion of the ankle joint. To study associations between ITW (with stiff ankles) and stiffness in other joints, muscle strength and bone density. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, 362 healthy children, adolescents and young adults (mean age (sd): 14.2 (3.9) years) participated. Range of joint motion (ROM), muscle strength, anthropometrics sport activities and bone density were measured. RESULTS: A prevalence of 12% of ITW was found. Nine percent had ITW and severely restricted ROM of the ankle joint. Children with ITW had three times higher chance of severe ROM restriction of the ankle joint. Participants with ITW and stiff ankle joints had a decreased ROM in other joints, whereas bone density and muscle strength were comparable. CONCLUSION: ITW and a decrease in ankle joint ROM might be due to local stiffness. Differential etiological diagnosis should be considered.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".