Sensory-Specific Balance Training in Older Adults: Effect on Position, Movement, and Velocity Sense at the Ankle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Age-related changes in proprioception contribute to impairments in postural control and increased fall risk in older adults. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to examine the effects of balance exercises on proprioception. SUBJECTS: The participants were 36 older people and 24 younger people who were healthy. METHODS: Older participants were randomly assigned to a balance exercise group (n=17) or a falls prevention education group (n=19). Baseline, postintervention, and 8-week follow-up measurements of 3 proprioceptive measures (threshold to perception of passive movement, passive joint position sense, and velocity discrimination) were obtained at the ankle. For comparative purposes, younger participants underwent a one-time assessment of the 3 proprioceptive measures. RESULTS: Postintervention improvements in velocity discrimination were found in the balance exercise group when compared with values at baseline and in the falls prevention education group. Age-related differences found at baseline were reduced in the balance exercise group after intervention. Improvements were not maintained at the 8-week follow-up. Threshold to perception of passive movement and passive joint position sense did not change as a function of the exercise intervention. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The results suggest that short-term improvements in velocity sense, but not movement and position sense, may be achieved following a balance exercise intervention.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".