MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2292825266 · doi:10.1002/mds.26572

<scp>M</scp>easurement instruments to assess posture, gait, and balance in <scp>P</scp>arkinson's disease: Critique and recommendations

2016· review· en· W2292825266 on OpenAlexaff
Bastiaan R. Bloem, Johan Marinus, Quincy J. Almeida, Alice Nieuwboer, Bart Post, Evžen Růžička, Christopher G. Goetz, Glenn T. Stebbins, Pablo Martínez‐Martín, Anette Schrag

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTinetti testGaitBalance (ability)Berg Balance ScalePhysical medicine and rehabilitationRating scaleFear of fallingPhysical therapyParkinson's diseaseGait analysisDynamic balancePsychologyMedicinePoison controlDiseaseInjury prevention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Disorders of posture, gait, and balance in Parkinson's disease (PD) are common and debilitating. This MDS-commissioned task force assessed clinimetric properties of existing rating scales, questionnaires, and timed tests that assess these features in PD. METHODS: A literature review was conducted. Identified instruments were evaluated systematically and classified as "recommended," "suggested," or "listed." Inclusion of rating scales was restricted to those that could be used readily in clinical research and practice. RESULTS: One rating scale was classified as "recommended" (UPDRS-derived Postural Instability and Gait Difficulty score) and 2 as "suggested" (Tinetti Balance Scale, Rating Scale for Gait Evaluation). Three scales requiring equipment (Berg Balance Scale, Mini-BESTest, Dynamic Gait Index) also fulfilled criteria for "recommended" and 2 for "suggested" (FOG score, Gait and Balance Scale). Four questionnaires were "recommended" (Freezing of Gait Questionnaire, Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale, Falls Efficacy Scale, Survey of Activities, and Fear of Falling in the Elderly-Modified). Four tests were classified as "recommended" (6-minute and 10-m walk tests, Timed Up-and-Go, Functional Reach). CONCLUSION: We identified several questionnaires that adequately assess freezing of gait and balance confidence in PD and a number of useful clinical tests. However, most clinical rating scales for gait, balance, and posture perform suboptimally or have been evaluated insufficiently. No instrument comprehensively and separately evaluates all relevant PD-specific gait characteristics with good clinimetric properties, and none provides separate balance and gait scores with adequate content validity for PD. We therefore recommend the development of such a PD-specific, easily administered, comprehensive gait and balance scale that separately assesses all relevant constructs. © 2016 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.098
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.098
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations315
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovement DisordersSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207