Noisy Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation Combined With a Multisensory Balance Program in Older Adults With Moderate to High Fall Risk: Protocol for a Feasibility Study for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reduced mobility and falls are common among older adults. Balance retraining programs are effective in reducing falls and in improving balance and mobility. Noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation is a low-level electrical stimulation used to reduce the threshold for the firing of vestibular neurons via a mechanism of stochastic resonance. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine the feasibility of using noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation to augment a balance training program for older adults at risk of falls. We hypothesize that noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation will enhance the effects of balance retraining in older adults at risk of falls. METHODS: In this 3-armed randomized controlled trial, community dwelling older adults at risk of falling will be randomly assigned to a noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation plus balance program (noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation group), sham plus balance program (sham group), or a no treatment group (control). Participants will attend the exercise group twice a week for 8 weeks with assessment of balance and gait pretreatment, posttreatment, and at 3 months postintervention. Primary outcome measures include postural sway, measured by center of pressure velocity, area and root mean square, and gait parameters such as speed, step width, step variability, and double support time. Spatial memory will also be measured using the triangle completion task and the 4 Mountains Test. RESULTS: Recruitment began in November 2020. Data collection and analysis are expected to be completed by December 2022. CONCLUSIONS: This study will evaluate the feasibility of using noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation alongside balance retraining in older adults at risk of falls and will inform the design of a fully powered randomized controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12620001172998); https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=379944. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/32085.
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 | 0.031 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.056 | 0.010 |
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".