MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626549605 · doi:10.1186/s12984-017-0265-7

Locomotor circumvention strategies are altered by stroke: II. Postural Coordination

2017· article· en· W2626549605 on OpenAlexafffund
Anuja Darekar, Anouk Lamontagne, Joyce Fung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish Rehabilitation Hospital
FundersInstitute of Neurosciences, Mental Health and AddictionCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsObstaclePhysical medicine and rehabilitationStroke (engine)NeurologyPsychologyPhysical therapyMedicineNeurosciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Locomotor strategies for obstacle circumvention require appropriate postural coordination that depends on sensorimotor integration within the central nervous system. It is not known how these strategies are affected by a stroke. The objective of this study was to contrast postural coordination strategies used for obstacle circumvention between post-stroke participants ( n = 12) and healthy controls ( n = 12). Participants walked towards a target in a virtual environment (11 × 8 m room) with cylindrical obstacles that were stationary or approaching from head-on, or diagonally 30° left/right. Two stepping strategies for obstacle circumvention were identified: 1) side step: increase in step width by the foot ipsilateral to the side of circumvention; 2) cross step: decrease in step width by the foot contralateral to the side of circumvention. The side step strategy was favoured by post-stroke individuals in circumventing stationary and head-on approaching obstacles. In circumventing diagonally approaching obstacles, healthy controls generally veered opposite to obstacle approach (>60% trials), whereas the majority of post-stroke participants (7/12) veered to the same side of obstacle approach (V same ). Post-stroke participants who veered to the opposite side (V opp , 5/12) were more independent and faster ambulators who favoured the side step strategy in circumventing obstacles approaching from the paretic side and cross step strategy for obstacles approaching from the non-paretic side. V same participants generally favoured the side step strategy for both diagonal approaches. Segmental rotation amplitudes and latencies were largest in the V same group, and significantly greater in post-stroke participants than controls for all obstacle conditions. All participants initiated circumvention with the feet followed by the pelvis and thorax, demonstrating a caudal-rostral sequence of reorientation. Postural coordination strategies for obstacle circumvention were altered post stroke, depending on the residual or restored functional abilities. Segmental re-orientations are also affected by the motion and direction of obstacle.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroEngineering and RehabilitationSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207