MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952272729 · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2019.00133

Mental Flexibility Influences the Association Between Poor Balance and Falls in Older People – A Secondary Analysis

2019· article· en· W2952272729 on OpenAlexaff
Frederico Pieruccini‐Faria, Stephen R. Lord, Barbara Toson, Wolfgang Kemmler, Daniel Schoene

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Aging Neuroscience · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Health and Medical Research Council
KeywordsCognitive flexibilityPerseverationFlexibility (engineering)Balance (ability)PsychologyFalls in older adultsExecutive functionsCognitionWisconsin Card Sorting TestPoison controlInjury preventionMedicineNeuropsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Impairments of balance predispose older people to falls. Some cognitive functions, especially executive functioning have been shown to affect balance and discriminate fallers from non-fallers. Mental flexibility is a component of the executive function and comprises multiple cognitive processes that work together to adjust the course of thoughts or actions according to the changing demands of a situation without the use of explicit instructions. However, the role of mental flexibility in balance in older people remains unclear. Mental flexibility comprises complementary cognitive functions required for dealing with unpredictable environmental demands. The study aim was to examine the relationship between mental flexibility and falls in a cohort of 212 older people (80.6 ±4.9 years; 62% female). We hypothesized that: (i) participants with impaired balance would have worse mental flexibility compared to those with good balance; and (ii) poor mental flexibility would predict falls in the sub-group with impaired balance. Balance performance was assessed by measuring postural sway while standing on a medium density foam mat with eyes open for 30 seconds. Mental flexibility was assessed using a computerized short-form of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST; 64 cards) with its sub-components comprising general performance, perseveration, failure-to-maintain set and conceptual ability. Falls were measured prospectively for 12-months using monthly calendars. MANCOVA revealed that WCST performance was associated with balance (Wilks’ Lambda = 0.883, F=2.168; p=0.013, partial eta squared (η2p) =.061) due primarily to reduced concept formation ability (F2,207=5.787, p=0.004, η2p =.053). Negative binomial regression analysis adjusting for age, education, contrast sensitivity, proprioception, inhibition and inhibitory choice stepping reaction time revealed that lower concept formation ability was predictive for falls (Incidence Rate Ratio 1.0648 (95% confidence interval 1.0316-1.08199)). Further, lower concept formation ability partly explained the association between balance and falls: i.e. fallers in the upper balance tertile had reduced concept formation performance whereas non-fallers had similar concept formation performance across the three balance tertiles. These findings suggest that poor mental flexibility affects the ability to maintain steady balance contributing to increased risk of falls in older people.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Aging NeuroscienceSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207