Individual limb contributions to mediolateral stability during gait
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mediolateral dynamic stability control is challenging for older-adults (OA) and is associated with lateral falls and hip fracture. Previous research examining the eccentricity of the net ground reaction force (GRFnet) and individual-limb GRFs have helped elucidate why OA exhibit greater mediolateral instability during stepping responses. The present work sought to understand the individual-limb contributions to mediolateral stability during gait, by examining whole-body kinematics and eccentricity of individual-limb GRFs. 28 younger-adults (YA) (18-31 years) and 28 OA (>65 years) completed 10 walking trials at a self-selected speed and step placement, all were right-limb dominant. Whole-body COM kinematics and individual-limb GRFs were quantified. The minimum distance between the COM and the lateral aspect of the BOS during each step was quantified (dmin) as a measure of kinematic instability. The eccentricity of individual-limb GRFs relative to the COM were calculated (?d) throughout the stance-phase. Positive and negative eccentricities of the individual-limb GRF were quantified using the mean difference (MD). Positive values are believed to be restabilizing (MDpos), limiting lateral COM displacement; negative values are destabilizing (MDneg). OA exhibited significantly greater dominant-side dmin and MDneg than YA. Larger dominant-side dmin among OA may suggest this is a strategy to maintain a larger margin of stability. The lack of no age-related differences on the non-dominant side may indicate OA inappropriately scale, which could increase the risk of lateral falls towards this side. Larger dominant-side MDneg could be restabilizing if caused by a larger medially directed GRF component, limiting the lateral linear acceleration of the COM.Acknowledgments: Support for this research was provided by the Manitoba Medical Service Foundation and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".