Sensorimotor integration of vision and proprioception for obstacle crossing in ambulatory individuals with spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Skilled walking, such as obstacle crossing, is an essential component of functional mobility. Sensorimotor integration of visual and proprioceptive inputs is important for successful obstacle crossing. The objective of this study was to understand how proprioceptive deficits affect obstacle-crossing strategies when controlling for variations in motor deficits in ambulatory individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Fifteen ambulatory individuals with SCI and 15 able-bodied controls were asked to step over an obstacle scaled to their motor abilities under full and obstructed vision conditions. An eye tracker was used to determine gaze behaviour and motion capture analysis was used to determine toe kinematics relative to the obstacle. Combined, bilateral hip and knee proprioceptive sense (joint position sense and movement detection sense) was assessed using the Lokomat and customized software controls. Combined, bilateral hip and knee proprioceptive sense in subjects with SCI varied and was significantly different from able-bodied subjects. Subjects with greater proprioceptive deficits stepped higher over the obstacle with their lead and trail limbs in the obstructed vision condition compared with full vision. Subjects with SCI also glanced at the obstacle more frequently and with longer fixation times compared with controls, but this was not related to proprioceptive sense. This study indicates that ambulatory individuals with SCI rely more heavily on vision to cross obstacles and show impairments in key gait parameters required for successful obstacle crossing. Our data suggest that proprioceptive deficits need to be considered in rehabilitation programs aimed at improving functional mobility in ambulatory individuals with SCI. NEW & NOTEWORTHY: This work is unique since it examines the contribution of combined, bilateral hip and knee proprioceptive sense on the recovery of skilled walking function, in addition to characterizing gaze behavior during a skilled walking task in people with motor-incomplete spinal cord injury.
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 | 0.000 | 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".