Sensorimotor Control Impairment in Young Adults With Idiopathic Scoliosis Compared With Healthy Controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: It has been hypothesized that the impaired sensorimotor control observed in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis (IS) may be related more to the onset of scoliosis than to the maturation of sensory systems or sensorimotor control mechanisms. The objective of this study was to assess sensorimotor control in adults diagnosed with IS in adolescence versus healthy controls. METHODS: The study included 20 young adults 20 to 24 years of age (10 healthy controls and 10 diagnosed with adolescent IS but not treated for it). Binaural bipolar galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) was delivered to assess sensorimotor control. Vertical forces under each foot and upper body kinematics along the frontal plane were measured before GVS (2-second window), during GVS (2-second window), immediately after the cessation of GVS (1-second window), and during the following 2 seconds. Balance control was assessed by calculating the root mean square values of vertical forces and upper body kinematics. RESULTS: Compared with healthy controls, the IS group showed greater body sway upon GVS; the amplitude of this sway was even greater immediately after the cessation of GVS-an outcome requiring sensorimotor control. CONCLUSION: Compared with normal controls, adults who had been diagnosed with IS in adolescence showed altered balance control immediately following GVS. This finding suggests that dysfunctional sensorimotor control may be related to the onset of scoliosis rather than to a transient suboptimal development of the sensory systems or sensorimotor control mechanisms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".