Age-Related Changes in Presynaptic Inhibition During Gait Initiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Age-related changes in presynaptic inhibition (PSI) have not been observed during gait initiation, which requires anticipatory postural adjustment (APA). As APA is centrally modulated and is impaired in older compared to young adults, here we aimed to study the presynaptic control and co-contraction levels in the ankle muscles during gait initiation in older compared to young adults. Fifteen older (age range 65-80 years) and 15 young adults (age range 19-30 years) performed a gait initiation task on a force platform under 3 conditions: (i) without electrical stimulation; (ii) test Hoffman reflex (H-reflex); and (iii) conditioned H-reflex. H-reflexes were evoked on the soleus muscle when the APA amplitude exceeded 10%-20% of the average baseline mediolateral force. Participants also performed quiet stance as a control task. Results showed that both age groups presented similar PSI levels during quiet stance (p = .941), while in the gait initiation older adults presented higher PSI levels, longer duration, and lower amplitude of APA than young adults (p < .05). Older adults presented higher co-contraction ratio in both tasks than young adults (p < .05). Correlations between the PSI levels and the APA amplitude (r = -0.61, p = .008), and between the PSI levels and the co-contraction ratio during gait initiation (r = -0.64, p = .005) were found for older adults only. APA amplitude explained 49% of the variance of the PSI levels (p = .003). Our findings suggest that older compared to young adults have increased presynaptic control to compensate for the decreased supraspinal modulation on impaired APAs during gait initiation.
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 | 0.000 | 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".