Comparing executive function, evoked hemodynamic response, and gait as predictors of variations in mobility for older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Falls represent a major concern for older adults and may serve as clinically salient index events for those presenting in the prodromal stages of mild cognitive impairment. Declines in executive function performance and in gait consistency have shown promise in predicting fall risk; however, associated neurophysiological underpinnings have received less attention. In this study, we used a multimodal approach to assess fall risk in a group of older adults with and without a previous fall history. METHOD: Processing speed, inductive reasoning, verbal fluency, crystallized ability, episodic memory, and executive functioning were assessed using standardized neuropsychological tests. Cognitive interference was assessed using the Multi-Source Interference Task. Spatiotemporal gait parameters were assessed with and without cognitive load using a 6.4-m instrumented walkway. Hemodynamic responses were measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. RESULTS: Whereas no group differences were observed in cognitive behavioral performance, during a cognitive interference task fallers displayed more oxygenated hemoglobin across the prefrontal cortex than nonfallers, suggesting that engaging in the cognitive task was more effortful for them overall, therefore eliciting greater cortical activation. Between-group differences in spatial as well as temporal gait parameters were also observed. CONCLUSIONS: These results are in keeping with assertions that diminished executive control is related to fall risk. Notably, the group differences observed in prefrontal cortical activation and in gait parameters may ultimately precede those observed in cognitive behavioral performance, with implications for measurement sensitivity and early identification.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".