Effect of stump flexion contracture with and without prosthetic alignment intervention towards postural stability among transtibial prosthesis users
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knee flexion contracture on a stump side is a phenomenon in which the stump cannot move in normal range of motion (ROM) or cannot be fully extended. This study has been carried out by using Biodex Stability System (BSS) in order to investigate the effect of stump flexion contracture towards the postural stability among the transtibial prosthesis users with the intervention of alignment accommodation. The BSS provides the reading of anterior-posterior stability index (APSI), medial-lateral stability index (MLSI), and overall stability index (OSI). Higher reading of the index indicates lesser stability. Each of the subjects had been tested in three different sessions that were Visit 1 (before contracture improvement), Visit 2 (after contracture improvement without alignment readjustment), and Visit 3 (after contracture improvement with alignment readjustment). The APSI reading was significantly higher during Visit 2 compared to Visit 1 and Visit 3. The OSI during Visit 2 was also found significantly higher compared to Visit 3. In Visit 2, the degree of contracture was significantly improved with 44.1% less than Visit 1. The stability index in anterior-posterior aspect (APSI) was proven to be lower as the prosthetic alignment was adjusted according to the ROM of knee. This finding explained that the alignment set up based on the adaptation with the stump's ROM can contribute positively in maintaining postural stability.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".