Are the mediolateral joint forces in the lower limbs different between scoliotic and healthy subjects during gait?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The quantification of internal joint efforts could be essential in the development of rehabilitation tools for patients with musculo-skeletal pathologies, such as scoliosis. In this context, the aim of this study was to compare the hips joint mediolateral forces during gait, between healthy subjects and adolescents with left lumbar or thoracolumbar scoliosis (AIS), categorized by their Cobb angle (CA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twelve healthy subjects, 12 AIS with CA between 20° and 40° and 16 AIS in pre-operative condition (CA : > 40°) walked at 4 km/h on an instrumented treadmill. The experimental set-up include six infrared cameras allow the computation of the tridimensional (3D) angular displacement and strain gauges located under the motor-driven treadmill allow the computation of ground reaction forces (GRF). The hips joint mediolateral forces were calculated using a 3D inverse dynamic of human body. One-way ANOVA was performed for the maximum, the minimum and the range of medio-lateral forces at each joint of the lower limbs. When appropriate, a Tukey's post hoc was performed to determine the differences. RESULTS: The mediolateral forces were significantly lower at the right hip for AIS with CA between 20° and 40° compared to healthy subject. CONCLUSION: The spinal deformation leads to a reduced medio-lateral force at the right hip, which could gradually change the scheme of postural adjustments for AIS during gait. Further research on the quantification of the joint lower limb efforts should include the knee and ankle joints to evaluate the impact of spinal deformation on the lower limb dynamic behaviour in AIS patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".