Postural organization and inter-limb coordination are altered after stroke when an isometric maximum bilateral pushing effort of the upper limbs is performed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postural strategies of the trunk and the lower limbs are linked to upper limb motor activities. The objective was to analyze the postural organization at the lower limbs as well as the inter-limb coordination during isometric maximal bilateral pushing of upper limbs. METHODS: Fifteen individuals after stroke and 17 healthy participants were assessed with an instrumented exerciser paired with an instrumented sitting surface while they executed isometric bilateral pushes with the upper limbs. The anteroposterior, vertical and mediolateral forces were recorded at the handles, the thighs and the feet. Force values at maximal bilateral pushing efforts at each segment and inter-limb coordination between sides were compared. FINDINGS: During the isometric pushes, the paretic maximal forces at the handles for stroke participants were lower than the nonparetic side and lower than both sides of the control participants (p < 0.036). The control and stroke participants had moderate to good coordination for the anteroposterior forces (hands and thighs). While they used similar postural strategies to the controls except for a decreased weight on the paretic foot, vertical forces were less coordinated at the handles and feet in the stroke group (p < 0.050). The inter-trial variability was also higher in the stroke group. INTERPRETATION: Bilateral pushing with gradual efforts induces impaired postural strategies and coordination between limbs in individuals after stroke. It may reveal to be a promising strategy to assess and train post-stroke individuals in a clinical setting. Also, providing feedback would help better control symmetry during efforts.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".