MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2467005430 · doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000001017

Ankle Proprioception-Associated Gait Patterns in Older Adults

2016· article· en· W2467005430 on OpenAlexaff
Seung-uk Ko, Eleanor M. Simonsick, Nandini Deshpande, Stephanie A. Studenski, Luigi Ferrucci

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsProprioceptionAnkleGaitBalance (ability)Physical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineSTRIDEPhysical therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Ankle proprioception training has been found to improve balance-related gait disorders; however, the relationship between ankle proprioception and specific gait patterns in older adults with and without impaired balance has not been systematically examined. METHODS: This study characterizes gait patterns of 230 older adults age 60-95 yr evaluated in the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging gait laboratory with (n = 82) and without impaired balance (inability to successfully complete a narrow walk) and examines ankle proprioception performance. RESULTS: Participants with impaired balance had a higher angle threshold for perceiving ankle movement than those without impaired balance even after controlling for the substantial age difference between groups (P = 0.017). Gait speed, stride length, hip and ankle range of motion, and mechanical work expenditure from the knee and ankle were associated with ankle proprioception performance (P < 0.050 for all) in the full sample, but these associations were evident only in participants with impaired balance in stratified analysis. CONCLUSION: Ankle proprioception in older persons with balance impairment may play a role in balance-related gait disorders and should be targeted for intervention.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.313 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations25
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207