Quantitative Mobility Assessment for Fall Risk Prediction in Dementia: A Systematic Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Impairments of gait and balance often progress through the course of dementia, and are associated with increased risk of falls. SUMMARY: This systematic review provides a critical analysis of the evidence linking quantitative measures of gait and balance to fall risk in older adults with dementia. Various instrumented measures of gait and postural stability including gait speed and non-instrumented performance measures including Timed Up and Go were shown to be capable of distinguishing fallers from non-fallers. Key Messages: Existing reviews indicate that impairments of gait and balance are associated with increased risk of falls in cognitively intact older people. There are inconsistencies, however, regarding the characteristics most predictive of a fall. In order to advance fall prevention efforts, there is an important need to understand the relationship between gait, balance, and fall risk, particularly in high-risk populations such as individuals with dementia.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it