A Novel Approach to Ambulatory Monitoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Promoting whole body activities, such as walking, can help improve recovery after stroke. However, little information exists regarding the characteristics of daily walking in patients enrolled in rehabilitation poststroke. The objectives of this study were to: (1) examine the quantity of walking and duration of individual bouts of walking during an inpatient day, (2) compare standard laboratory symmetry measures with measures of symmetry captured throughout the day, and (3) investigate the association between quantity of walking and indices of stroke severity. METHODS: The study examined ambulatory activity among 16 inpatients with subacute stroke who were bilaterally instrumented with a wireless accelerometer above the ankle for approximately 8 continuous hours. RESULTS: On average, patients demonstrated 47.5 minutes (standard deviation [SD] = 26.6 minutes) of total walking activity and walking bout durations of 54.4 s (SD = 21.5 s). A statistically significant association was found between the number of walking bouts to total walking time (r = .76; P = .006) and laboratory gait speed (r = .51; P = .045) and between laboratory gait speed and balance impairment (r = .60; P = .013). Also, a significant increase in gait asymmetry was observed during day-long measurement compared with the standard laboratory-based assessment (P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: Rather modest amounts of daily walking were found for these ambulatory inpatients, consistent with previous reports about patients after stroke. Bouts of walking were short in duration, and the gait was more asymmetrical, compared with a standard gait assessment. Unobtrusive monitoring of daily walking exposes the characteristics and temporal qualities of poststroke ambulation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".