Exergames Training Effects on Gait During Single and Dual Tasks in Sexagenarian Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study was designed to analyze the effects of an exergames training program on gait parameters while holding a cellphone conversation at self-selected walking speed (SSWS) and fast walking speed (FWS). Materials and Methods: Twenty-one older women (66.3 ± 4.0 years) practiced exergames for 12 weeks and were assessed for spatiotemporal gait parameters at SSWS and FWS under single task and dual task. The strength of the lower limbs was measured by an isokinetic dynamometer (Byodex System 3). The cognitive function was assessed with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). The tests were assessed 4 weeks before the start of the exergames training (baseline, T0), immediately before (pretraining, T1), and at the end of 12 weeks of the exergame training (post-training, T2), except for the MoCA test that was assessed at T0 and T2. Results: The spatiotemporal gait parameters at SSWS and FWS showed extensive changes when a cellphone conversation was sustained (e.g., 6.5% and 5.8% reduction in walking speed, respectively). Exergames training was not effective in minimizing these changes or improving muscle strength after 12 weeks (<3.0%). Minor cognitive improvements (0.5 points) were observed in response to training. Conclusion: Holding a cellphone conversation while walking changed several gait parameters, irrespective of the walking speed. The spatiotemporal gait parameters and lower limb muscle strength in sexagenarian women remained unchanged after the exergames training program.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".