Freezing of gait in Parkinson's disease: a perceptual cause for a motor impairment?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While freezing of gait (FOG) is typically considered a motor impairment, the fact that it occurs more frequently in confined spaces suggests that perception of space might contribute to FOG. The present study evaluated how doorway size influenced characteristics of gait that might be indicative of freezing. Changes in spatiotemporal aspects of gait were evaluated while walking through three different-sized doorways (narrow (0.675 m wide x 2.1 m high), normal (0.9 m wide x 2.1 m high) and wide (1.8 m wide x 2.1 m high)) in three separate groups: 15 individuals with Parkinson's disease confirmed to be experiencing FOG at the time of test; 16 non-FOG individuals with Parkinson's disease and 16 healthy age-matched control participants. Results for step length indicated that the FOG group was most affected by the narrow doorway and was the only group whose step length was dependent on upcoming doorway size as indicated by a significant interaction of group by condition (F(4,88)=2.73, p<0.034). Importantly, the FOG group also displayed increased within-trial variability of step length and step time, which was exaggerated as doorway size decreased (F(4,88)=2.99, p<0.023). A significant interaction between group and condition for base of support measures indicated that the non-FOG participants were also affected by doorway size (similar to Parkinson's disease FOG) but only in the narrow doorway condition. These results support the notion that some occurrences of freezing may be the result of an underlying perceptual mechanism that interferes with online movement planning.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".