MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168944750 · doi:10.2522/ptj.20130298

Relationships Between Balance and Cognition in Patients With Subjective Cognitive Impairment, Mild Cognitive Impairment, and Alzheimer Disease

2014· article· en· W2168944750 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Economics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionBalance (ability)Verbal fluency testPsychologyDementiaTrail Making TestDiseaseBalance problemsGaitPhysical medicine and rehabilitationClinical psychologyAudiologyNeuropsychologyMedicinePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Balance impairments are common in patients with Alzheimer disease (AD), but which aspects of balance are affected, at which stage of cognitive impairment, and their associations with cognitive domains remain unexplored. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were: (1) to explore differences in balance abilities among patients with subjective cognitive impairment (SCI) or mild cognitive impairment (MCI), mild AD, and moderate AD and (2) to examine the relationship between the various aspects of balance and cognitive domains. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study. METHODS: Home-dwelling patients with SCI or MCI (n=33), mild AD (n=99), and moderate AD (n=38) participated in this study. The Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest), comprising 6 subscales-"Biomechanical Constraints," "Stability Limits/Verticality," "Anticipatory Postural Adjustments," "Postural Responses," "Sensory Orientation," and "Stability in Gait"-was used to assess balance. Cognitive domains were assessed using the following measures: Mini-Mental Status Examination, Word-List Learning Test from the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD), Verbal Fluency Test, Clock Drawing Test, and Trail Making Test, parts A and B (TMT-A and TMT-B, respectively). Two-way between-group analyses of variance, adjusted for age, were used to analyze differences among the groups. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to explore the associations between balance and cognition. RESULTS: Differences were found between the groups on all BESTest subscales; the moderate AD group had the worst scores. The TMT-B (measuring executive function) was associated with all of the BESTest subscales after controlling for demographic factors. LIMITATIONS: The cross-sectional design hampered interpretation of the development of balance impairments. CONCLUSIONS: The study findings indicate that all aspects of balance control deteriorate with increasing severity of cognitive impairment and that executive function plays an important role in balance control. Physical therapists should pay attention to these findings both in clinical practice and in future research.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.796

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it