Balance Markers in Adolescents at 1 Month Postconcussion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Balance Error Scoring System (BESS) shows that balance tends to recover within days after a concussion, whereas measures of the movement of the center of pressure (COP) show that balance deficits can persist up to 1 month after concussion. While approximately 30% of adolescents suffering concussion have functional consequences including balance deficits, evidence of the use of different balance assessments for concussion is limited within this population. PURPOSE: To compare performance on a series of balance assessments between adolescents with a diagnosed concussion at 1 month postinjury and noninjured control participants within the same age distribution. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Thirty-three adolescents 1 month postconcussion and 33 control participants completed the BESS followed by two, 2-minute trials standing on a Nintendo Wii Balance Board (WBB), during which the COP under their feet was recorded using 2 testing protocols: (1) double-leg stance, eyes open (EO) and (2) double-leg stance, eyes closed (EC). Participants then completed a dual-task condition (DT) with eyes open combining a double-leg stance and a Stroop color and word test while standing on the WBB. Three commonly used COP variables, anterior-posterior (A/P) and mediolateral (M/L) velocity and 95% ellipse, were computed for each condition performed on the WBB. RESULTS: = .007). No significant group difference was identified for BESS total score. CONCLUSION: At 1 month postconcussion, participants continued to demonstrate balance deficits in COP control despite scoring similar to controls on the BESS. Simple COP measures of balance may identify subtle impairments not captured by the BESS.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".