Differential Gait Decline in Parkinson’s Disease Enhances Discrimination of Gait Freezers from Non-Freezers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Freezing of gait (FOG) is a debilitating feature of Parkinson's disease (PD) for which treatments are limited. To develop neuroprotective strategies, determining whether disease progression is different in phenotypic variants of PD is essential. OBJECTIVE: To determine if freezers have a faster decline in spatiotemporal gait parameters. METHODS: Subjects were enrolled in a longitudinal study and assessed every 3- 6 months. Continuous gait in the levodopa ON-state was collected using a gait mat (Protokinetics). The slope of change/year in spatiotemporal gait parameters was calculated. RESULTS: 26 freezers, 31 non-freezers, and 25 controls completed an average of 6 visits over 28 months. Freezers had a faster decline in mean stride-length, stride-velocity, swing-%, single-support-%, and variability in single-support-% compared to non-freezers (p < 0.05). Gait decline was not correlated with initial levodopa dose, duration of levodopa therapy, change in levodopa dose or change in Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores (p > 0.25). Gait progression parameters were required to obtain 95% accuracy in categorizing freezers and non-freezers groups in a forward step-wise binary regression model. Change in mean stride-length, mean stride-width, and swing-% variability along with initial foot-length variability, mean swing-% and apathy scores were significant variables in the model. CONCLUSION: Freezers had a faster temporal decline in objectively quantified gait, and inclusion of longitudinal gait changes in a binary regression model greatly increased categorization accuracy. Levodopa dosing, cognitive decline and disease severity were not significant in our model. Early detection of this differential decline may help define freezing prone groups for testing putative treatments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".