Assessing turning ability in subtypes of Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While shuffling gait is typical of Parkinson's disease (PD), difficulty turning appears to be a motor impairment in some but not all patients. For example, patients who experience freezing of gait (FOG) exhibit interruptions to gait while turning. In contrast, patients with axial rigidity rotate segments simultaneously during a turn (so called en bloc turns). The aim of this study was to evaluate if turning deficits in patients with FOG is related to axial control (as seen in axially rigid patients). As such, 3 PD groups were evaluated: FOG (n=6), axial rigidity (AR) (n=6), and a PD control group with neither symptom (CO) (n=6). Outcome measures included: number of steps, time and cadence during the turn in 3 walking conditions: straight (0o); 90o and 180o turns. Five trials of each walking condition were completed. Turning conditions required participants to turn at the mid-point of a 6 m path towards a pre-determined eye-level target located at the end of the path. Results showed increases in the number of steps as turn angle sharpened (p
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) | 0.001 | 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".