Effects of the unity vacuum suspension system on transtibial gait for simulated non-level surfaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Walking on various surfaces encountered in everyday life requires lower limb prosthesis users to continually adapt their movement patterns. Elevated vacuum suspension systems could improve transtibial amputee gait on non-level surfaces; however, research is lacking to guide clinical practice. Twelve transtibial amputees were fitted with the Össur sleeveless vacuum suspension system (Unity). After a one month accommodation period, the CAREN-Extended system was used to evaluate gait on a self-paced treadmill when walking with continuous perturbations (medial-lateral translations, rolling hills, simulated uneven ground) with an active or inactive vacuum suspension system. Significant differences between active and inactive vacuum conditions (p<0.05) were found for some temporal-spatial and kinematic gait parameters, but the differences were small and not considered clinically significant. Our findings suggest that potential vacuum pump failures would not immediately affect gait performance in a moderately high functioning amputee population. However, residual limb volume changes over time due to the removal of elevated vacuum may adversely affect socket fit, leading to greater gait differences and reduced quality of life.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".