Weight-bearing on the lower limbs in a sitting position during bilateral movement of the upper limbs in post-stroke hemiparetic subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Verify weight-bearing on the feet in a sitting position during pointing in different directions with 1 or both upper limbs. DESIGN: Comparative study. SUBJECTS: Fifteen subjects with post-stroke hemiparesis with good to very good motor recovery and 13 healthy subjects participated in the study. METHODS: The subjects were seated on a chair with each foot resting on a force plate. They had to touch with 1 or, simultaneously with both hands, 2 target(s) located in front of them or at a 45 degrees angle on either side at a standardized distance beyond their upper limb's length. The percentage of weight loading variation under each foot was measured. RESULTS: Weight-bearing on the paretic foot is reduced during unilateral and bilateral pointing in the anterior direction and 45 degrees ipsilateral to the paretic side. However, both unilateral and bilateral pointing 45 degrees contralateral to the paretic side produced symmetrical weight-bearing on both feet, paretic and non-paretic. CONCLUSION: Since the paretic muscles of the trunk are probably used to control the leaning of the trunk towards the non-paretic side, the subjects with hemiparesis may put weight on the paretic foot to compensate for trunk weakness and maintain balance.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".