Functional Neural Underpinnings of Increased Falls Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Impaired cognition, especially in the domain of executive functions, is a major risk factor for falls in older adults. However, the underlying neural mechanism of the association between cognitive function and falls risk remains unclear. The current study compared the performance on mobility and cognitive assessments, and brain activation under Stroop task between fallers (>=2 falls in the past year) and non-fallers (0 or 1 fall in the past year). We found that during the incongruent condition of Stroop task, higher activation in precuneous, frontal and temporal areas was observed in fallers, while they showed comparable task performance as non-fallers. In addition, the contrast between congruent and incongruent conditions showed fallers exhibited increased activation in middle frontal region (z>1.7, P<0.05). Further, through mediation analysis, our data revealed that brain activation in temporal and frontal-paracingulate regions mediated the relationship between Montreal Cognitive Assessment and number of falls (confidence interval = 95%), after controlling for age and sex. Overall, our findings suggested that lower neural efficiency may be an underlying mechanism by which cognitive function is associated with 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".