Correlation between the strength of muscle actions of the paretic lower-limb and gait speed after stroke: Results of a meta-analysis of six studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Lower limb strength after stroke, particularly of the more paretic side, is known to correlate with comfortable gait speed. This meta-analysis sought to determine the relative value of 6 muscle group strengths as explanators of comfortable gait speed. METHODS: Relevant literature was sought using PubMed, CINAHL Scopus, and a hand search. Information on samples, measurements, and correlations were extracted. Correlational data were subjected to meta-analysis. RESULTS: Results from 6 studies were consolidated. The summary correlations between paretic lower limb strength and comfortable gait speed ranged from 0.45 to 0.61. Data were highly heterogeneous but did not show publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: The correlation between the lower limb strength and comfortable gait speed strength was moderate. However, it does not provide an adequate explanation to guide clinical practice.
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 | 0.019 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.040 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".