MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898522301 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0205174

Multi-joint gait clustering for children and youth with diplegic cerebral palsy

2018· article· en· W2898522301 on OpenAlexafffund
Gregor Kuntze, Alberto Nettel‐Aguirre, Gina Ursulak, Ion Robu, Nicole Bowal, Simon Goldstein, Carolyn A. Emery

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta InnovatesAlberta Children's Hospital FoundationAmerican College Health FoundationChildren's Hospital Foundation
KeywordsCerebral palsyGaitSagittal planePhysical medicine and rehabilitationKinematicsGait analysisCluster analysisAnklePhysical therapyMedicineMathematicsStatisticsPhysicsSurgeryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Clinical management of children and youth with cerebral palsy (CP) is increasingly supported by computerized gait analysis. Methods have been developed to reduce the complexity of interpreting biomechanical data and quantify meaningful movement patterns. However, few methods are inclusive of multiple joints and planes of motion, and consider the entire duration of gait phases; potentially limiting insight into this heterogeneous pathology. The objective of this study was to assess the implementation of k-means clustering to determine clusters of participants with CP based on multi-joint gait kinematics. METHODS: Barefoot walking kinematics were analyzed for a historical cohort (2007-2015) of 37 male and female children and youth with spastic diplegic CP [male n = 21; female n = 16; median age = 12 (range 5-25) years; Gross Motor Function Classification System Level I n = 17 and Level II n = 20]. Mean stance phase hip (sagittal, coronal, transverse), knee (sagittal), and ankle (sagittal) kinematics were time (101 data points), mean and range normalized. Normalized kinematics data vectors (505 data points) for all participants were then combined in a single data matrix M (37x505 data points). K-means clustering was conducted 10 times for all data in M (2-5 seeds, 50 repetitions). Cluster quality was assessed using the mean Silhouette value ([Formula: see text]) and cluster repeatability. The mean kinematic patterns of each cluster were explored with respect to a dataset of normally developing (ND) children using Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM, alpha 0.05). Differences in potentially confounding variables (age, height, weight, walking speed) between clusters (C) were assessed individually in SPSS (IBM, USA) using Kruskal-Wallis H tests (alpha 0.05). RESULTS: Four clusters (n1 = 5, n2 = 12, n3 = 12, n4 = 8) provided the largest possible data separation based on high cluster repeatability (96.8% across 10 repetitions) and comparatively greater cluster quality [[Formula: see text] (SD), 0.275 (0.152)]. Participant data with low cluster quality values displayed a tendency toward lower cluster allocation repeatability. Distinct kinematic differences between clusters and ND data were observable. Specifically, C1 displayed a unique continuous hip abduction and external rotation pattern. In contrast, participants in C2 moved from hip adduction (loading response) to abduction (mid to terminal stance) and featured a unique ankle plantarflexor pattern during pre-swing. C3 was characterized by gait deviations in the sagittal plane of the hip, knee and ankle only. C4 displayed evidence for the most substantial hip and knee extension, and ankle plantarflexion deficit from midstance to pre-swing. DISCUSSION: K-means clustering enabled the determination of up to four kinematic clusters of individuals with spastic diplegic CP using multi-joint angles without a priori data reduction. A cluster boundary effect was demonstrated by the Silhouette value, where data with values approaching zero were more likely to change cluster allocation. Exploratory analyses using SPM revealed significant differences across joints and between clusters indicating the formation of clinically meaningful clusters. Further work is needed to determine the effects of including further topographical classifications of CP, additional biomechanical data, and the sensitivity to clinical interventions to assess the potential for informing clinical decision-making.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations31
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207