MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912601422 · doi:10.33137/cpoj.v1i2.32020

PERFORMANCE, PATIENT BENEFITS AND ACCEPTANCE OF A NEW GENERATION OF MICROPROCESSOR-CONTROLLED STANCE AND SWING CONTROL ORTHOSIS

2018· article· en· W2912601422 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Nadine Wismer, OA Alexander Krebs, Frank Braatz, Thomas Schmalz, Andreas Kranzl, Christian Breuer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBraceSwingPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGaitMedicineOrthoticsPhysical therapyMalletAnkleKnee flexionComputer scienceEngineeringSurgeryMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION
 By enabling users to flex the orthotic leg during swing phase and safely lock it during stance phase, stance control orthosis (SCO) offers clear benefits compared to locked knee-ankle-foot-orthosis (KAFO)1. Since such orthoses do not offer dampened knee flexion in the weight-bearing condition, this represents a limitation in everyday activities such as ramp and stair descent. C-Brace, a microprocessor controlled stance and swing orthosis (SSCO), overcomes many of those problems. Maximum knee flexion angle in stance and swing phase during level walking are closer to physiological values with C-Brace compared to conventional KAFOs2. The patients are with C-Brace able to descend stairs and ramps reciprocally2. Furthermore, patients report of safer and easier ability to perform activities of daily living3. The main aim of next generation C-Brace is a reduction in size and an increase of adaptability to the patient’s anatomic structure. Due to technological changes, improvements especially for difficult ADLs (e.g. walking on uneven ground) are expected.
 Abstract PDF Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/32020/24438
 How to cite: Wismer N, Krebs A, Braatz F, Schmalz T, Kranzl A, Breuer C. PERFORMANCE, PATIENT BENEFITS AND ACCEPTANCE OF A NEW GENERATION OF MICROPROCESSOR-CONTROLLED STANCE AND SWING CONTROL ORTHOSIS. CANADIAN PROSTHETICS & ORTHOTICS JOURNAL, VOLUME 1, ISSUE 2, 2018; ABSTRACT, POSTER PRESENTATION AT THE AOPA’S 101ST NATIONAL ASSEMBLY, SEPT. 26-29, VANCOUVER, CANADA, 2018.DOI: https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v1i2.32020 
 Abstracts were Peer-reviewed by the American Orthotic Prosthetic Association (AOPA) 101st National Assembly Scientific Committee. 
 http://www.aopanet.org/

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score0.667

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Prosthetics & Orthotics JournalSame topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207