Vertical ground reaction force marker for Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parkinson's disease (PD) patients regularly exhibit abnormal gait patterns. Automated differentiation of abnormal gait from normal gait can serve as a potential tool for early diagnosis as well as monitoring the effect of PD treatment. The aim of current study is to differentiate PD patients from healthy controls, on the basis of features derived from plantar vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) data during walking at normal pace. The current work presents a comprehensive study highlighting the efficacy of different machine learning classifiers towards devising an accurate prediction system. Selection of meaningful feature based on sequential forward feature selection, the swing time, stride time variability, and center of pressure features facilitated successful classification of control and PD gaits. Support Vector Machine (SVM), K-nearest neighbor (KNN), random forest, and decision trees classifiers were used to build the prediction model. We found that SVM with cubic kernel outperformed other classifiers with an accuracy of 93.6%, the sensitivity of 93.1%, and specificity of 94.1%. In comparison to other studies, utilizing same dataset, our designed prediction system improved the classification performance by approximately 10%. The results of the current study underscore the ability of the VGRF data obtained non-invasively from wearable devices, in combination with a SVM classifier trained on meticulously selected features, as a tool for diagnosis of PD and monitoring effectiveness of therapy post pathology.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".