Diagnostic value of gait speed and "Timed Up and Go" on Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective It is commonly known that gait disturbance is related with Alzheimer's disease (AD) in its late stage. However, recent studies showed that gait disturbance may start in the early stage of AD or even mild cognitive impairment (MCI). This paper aims to explore the correlation of gait speed and Timed Up & Go (TUG) with AD and MCI. Methods All subjects were examined by Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Besides, they were designed to walk in two assigned conditions: single task (free gait) and dual task (walking and counting). The gait parameters of Four-Meter Walk Test (4mWT) and TUG were measured in the two conditions. Results Forty-two patients with AD, 39 with MCI and 39 control subjects were enrolled in this study. Compared with control group, both single and dual gait speed of MCI and AD groups decreased (MCI single: t = -3.223, P = 0.002; MCI dual: t = -2.476, P = 0.016; AD single: t = -3.793, P = 0.003; AD dual: t = -12.708, P = 0.000). For TUG, compared with control group, both single and dual tasks of MCI and AD groups increased (MCI single: t = 2.831, P = 0.006; MCI dual: t = 4.060, P = 0.000; AD single: t = 3.420, P = 0.001; AD dual: t = 4.259, P = 0.000). As for the comparison between MCI and AD groups, dual gait speed of AD group decreased (t = -8.254, P = 0.000), but there was no significant increase of both single and dual TUG in AD group (single: t = 1.569, P = 0.121; dual: t = 1.904, P = 0.061). Compared with single task, no significant difference existed in dual gait speed of MCI group (t = -1.934, P = 0.057), while dual TUG of MCI group increased (t = 3.693, P = 0.000); dual gait speed of AD group decreased (t = -12.333, P = 0.000), while dual TUG increased significantly (t = 2.584, P = 0.012). Conclusions Gait disturbance can be found even in early stage of dementia, so gait speed and TUG are reliable parameters for identification of AD, even MCI. Dual TUG increasing is meaningful for both AD and MCI, while dual gait speed shows its great significance in AD. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-6731.2015.07.011
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".