Failure on the Foam Eyes Closed Test of Standing Balance Associated With Reduced Semicircular Canal Function in Healthy Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Standing on foam with eyes closed (FOEC) has been characterized as a measure of vestibular function; however, the relative contribution of vestibular function and proprioceptive function to the FOEC test has not been well described. In this study, the authors investigate the relationship between peripheral sensory systems (vestibular and proprioception) and performance on the FOEC test in a cohort of healthy adults. DESIGN: A total of 563 community-dwelling healthy adults (mean age, 72.7 [SD, 12.6] years; range, 27 to 93 years) participating in the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging were tested. Proprioceptive threshold (PROP) was evaluated with passive motion detection at the right ankle. Vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) gain was measured using video head impulses. Otolith function was measured with cervical and ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials. Participants stood on FOEC for 40 sec while wearing BalanSens (BioSensics, LLC, Watertown, MA) to quantify center of mass sway area. A mixed-model multiple logistic regression was used to examine the odds of passing the FOEC test based on PROP, VOR, cervical vestibular-evoked myogenic potential, and ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potential function in a multisensory model while controlling for age and gender. RESULTS: The odds of passing the FOEC test decreased by 15% (p < 0.001) for each year of increasing age and by 8% with every 0.1 reduction in VOR gain (p = 0.025). Neither PROP nor otolith function was significantly associated with passing the FOEC test. CONCLUSIONS: Failure to maintain balance during FOEC may serve as a proxy for rotational vestibular contributions to postural control. Semicircular canals are more sensitive to low-frequency motion than otoliths that may explain these relationships because standing sway is dominated by lower frequencies. Lower VOR gain and increased age independently decreased the odds of passing the test.
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".