MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214011130 · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2021.711054

An fNIRS Investigation of Discrete and Continuous Cognitive Demands During Dual-Task Walking in Young Adults

2021· article· en· W3214011130 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Human Neuroscience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsTask (project management)CognitionDual (grammatical number)Cognitive psychologyPsychologyComputer sciencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeuroscienceMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction : Dual-task studies have demonstrated that walking is attention-demanding for younger adults. However, numerous studies have attributed this to task type rather than the amount of required to accomplish the task. This study examined four tasks: two discrete (i.e., short intervals of attention) and two continuous (i.e., sustained attention) to determine whether greater attentional demands result in greater dual-task costs due to an overloaded processing capacity. Methods : Nineteen young adults (21.5 ± 3.6 years, 13 females) completed simple reaction time (SRT) and go/no-go (GNG) discrete cognitive tasks and n-back (NBK) and double number sequence (DNS) continuous cognitive tasks with or without self-paced walking. Prefrontal cerebral hemodynamics were measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) and performance was measured using response time, accuracy, and gait speed. Results : Repeated measures ANOVAs revealed decreased accuracy with increasing cognitive demands ( p = 0.001) and increased dual-task accuracy costs ( p < 0.001). Response times were faster during the single compared to dual-tasks during the SRT ( p = 0.005) and NBK ( p = 0.004). DNS gait speed was also slower in the dual compared to single task ( p < 0.001). Neural findings revealed marginally significant interactions between dual-task walking and walking alone in the DNS ( p = 0.06) and dual -task walking compared to the NBK cognitive task alone ( p = 0.05). Conclusion : Neural findings suggest a trend towards increased PFC activation during continuous tasks. Cognitive and motor measures revealed worse performance during the discrete compared to continuous tasks. Future studies should consider examining different attentional demands of motor tasks.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it