A prospective study examining balance confidence among individuals with lower limb amputation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: In this study we assessed whether balance confidence scores changed over a 2-year follow up period, and identified predictors of balance confidence and predictors of change in balance confidence among lower limb amputees. METHOD: A prospective follow-up survey of 245 community living adults with unilateral below and above knee lower limb amputation who used their prosthetic limb daily was conducted. Balance confidence, assessed using the 16-item Activity-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale, socio-demographic, health and amputation related variables were collected at baseline and 2 years later. RESULTS: ABC scores were similar at baseline (mean = 67.6; SD = 25.7) and follow up (mean = 68.0; SD = 25.8). Lower balance confidence scores at follow up were predicted by older age, being female, use of a mobility device, poor perceived health, increased symptoms of depression, having to concentrate while walking, and fear of falling (all p < 0.05). Predictors of change in balance confidence included gender and perceived health (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Balance confidence appears to be a persistent problem in the amputee population. Health professionals are encouraged to consider balance confidence as a potentially important variable that may influence function in this clinically unique group of individuals. The identified predictor variables may be useful to clinicians in targeting individuals who require attention to improve balance confidence.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".