MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046288584 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-69667-8

Detrended fluctuation analysis of gait dynamics when entraining to music and metronomes at different tempi in persons with multiple sclerosis

2020· article· en· W3046288584 on OpenAlexaff
Lousin Moumdjian, Pieter‐Jan Maes, Simone Dalla Bella, Leslie M. Decker, Bart Moens, Peter Feys, Marc Leman

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and Biological Electrophysiology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInternational Laboratory for Brain, Music and Sound ResearchCentre for Research on Brain Language and Music
FundersVlaamse regeringUniversiteit HasseltUniversiteit Gent
KeywordsMetronomeDetrended fluctuation analysisBeat (acoustics)GaitRhythmPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGait analysisPsychologyMathematicsPhysicsMedicineAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In persons with multiple sclerosis (PwMS), synchronizing walking to auditory stimuli such as to music and metronomes have been shown to be feasible, and positive clinical effects have been reported on step frequency and perception of fatigue. Yet, the dynamic interaction during the process of synchronization, such as the coupling of the steps to the beat intervals in music and metronomes, and at different tempi remain unknown. Understanding these interactions are clinically relevant, as it reflects the pattern of step intervals over time, known as gait dynamics. 28 PwMS and 29 healthy controls were instructed to walk to music and metronomes at 6 tempi (0-10% in increments of 2%). Detrended fluctuation analysis was applied to calculate the fractal statistical properties of the gait time-series to quantify gait dynamics by the outcome measure alpha. The results showed no group differences, but significantly higher alpha when walking to music compared to metronomes, and when walking to both stimuli at tempi + 8, + 10% compared to lower tempi. These observations suggest that the precision and adaptation gain differ during the coupling of the steps to beats in music compared to metronomes (continuous compared to discrete auditory structures) and at different tempi (different inter-beat-intervals).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations25
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicPlant and Biological Electrophysiology StudiesFrench-language works237,207