Six-Minute Walk Test in Individuals With Unilateral Lower Limb Amputations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The 6-minute walk test (6MWT) is one of the common clinical tests to assess rehabilitation progress and needs in individuals with lower-limb amputation (iLLAs). However, the analysis of this test is mostly limited to the distance parameter. The first aim was to investigate effort intensity and spatiotemporal parameters of 6MWT in iLLAs using inertial measurement units (IMUs) and heart rate (HR) monitor, and second, to assess physical, physiological, and pain-related aspects of fatigue over 6MWT. Methods: Eleven unilateral iLLAs (57.91±15.63 years old) participated in this study. To evaluate HR and spatiotemporal parameters over 6MWT, data were classified using 6 intervals of 1 minute each (I1-I6). The pain level of participants was estimated using the visual analog scale (VAS). Results: Our results showed that the means of normalized HR gradually increased over 6MWT (I1: 61.59±10.73 HR max %, I6: 70.15±12.26 HR max %, P = .003). Variability of HR during the first interval of 6MWT was higher than the others ( P < .05). The stance ratio of the gait cycle increased over 6MWT ( P < .05). Cadence and speed decreased over 6MWT ( P < .05). VAS score after 6MWT was significantly higher than before 6MWT ( P = .016). Conclusion: In this preliminary study, effort intensity over 6MWT gradually increased because of enhancement of HR. Deterioration of speed and cadence and enhancement of stance ratio over 6MWT imply potential physical aspects of fatigue and instability. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.
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 | 0.001 | 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".