Gait Speed and Variability for Usual Pace and Pedestrian Crossing Conditions in Older Adults Using the GAITRite Walkway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To determine gait characteristics of community-dwelling older adults at different speeds and during a crosswalk simulation. Methods: Twenty-two older adults completed walking trials at self-selected slow, usual, and fast paces, and at a crosswalk simulation, using the GAITRite walkway. These objective measures were complemented by self-report health and mobility questionnaires. Results: Gait speeds at self-selected slow, usual, and fast paces were 98.7 (18.1) cm/s, 140.9 (20.4) cm/s, and 174.0 (20.6) cm/s, respectively, and at simulated crosswalk conditions was 144.2 (22.3) cm/s. For usual pace, right step length variability was 2.0 (1.4) cm and step time variability was 13.6 (7.2) ms, compared with 2.4 (1.3) cm and 17.3 (9.7) ms, respectively, for crosswalk conditions. Discussion: Our sample of healthy older adults walked at a speed exceeding standards for crossing urban streets; however, in response to a crosswalk signal, participants adopted a significantly faster and more variable gait.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".