Vision-Based Assessment of Gait Features Associated With Falls in People With Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gait impairments contribute to falls in people with dementia. In this study, we used a vision-based system to record episodes of walking over a 2-week period as participants moved naturally around their environment, and from these calculated spatiotemporal, stability, symmetry, and acceleration gait features. The aim of this study was to determine whether features of gait extracted from a vision-based system are associated with falls, and which of these features are most strongly associated with falling. METHODS: Fifty-two people with dementia admitted to a specialized dementia unit participated in this study. Thirty different features describing baseline gait were extracted from Kinect recordings of natural gait over a 2-week period. Baseline clinical and demographic measures were collected, and falls were tracked throughout the participants' admission. RESULTS: A total of 1,744 gait episodes were recorded (mean 33.5 ± 23.0 per participant) over a 2-week baseline period. There were a total of 78 falls during the study period (range 0-10). In single variable analyses, the estimated lateral margin of stability, step width, and step time variability were significantly associated with the number of falls during admission. In a multivariate model controlling for clinical and demographic variables, the estimated lateral margin of stability (p = .01) was remained associated with number of falls. CONCLUSIONS: Information about gait can be extracted from vision-based recordings of natural walking. In particular, the lateral margin of stability, a measure of lateral gait stability, is an important marker of short-term falls risk.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".