MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216780389 · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2021.766884

Pathological Gait Signatures of Post-stroke Dementia With Toe-Off and Heel-to-Ground Angles Discriminate From Alzheimer’s Disease

2021· article· en· W3216780389 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Linhui Ni, Wen Lv, Di Sun, Yi Sun, Yu Sun, Xinxin Xu, Mengyue Chang, Xing Han, Shuai Tao, Xingyue Hu, Huaying Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Aging Neuroscience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical and Health Research Project of Zhejiang ProvinceNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGaitDementiaStroke (engine)Physical medicine and rehabilitationSTRIDECadenceMedicineNeuropsychologyReceiver operating characteristicCognitionPsychologyPhysical therapyDiseaseInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the limited power of neuropsychological tests, there is a need for a simple, reliable means, such as gait, to identify mild dementia and its subtypes. However, gait characteristics of patients with post-stroke dementia (PSD) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) are unclear. We sought to describe their gait signatures and to explore gait parameters distinguishing PSD from post-stroke non-dementia (PSND) and patients with AD. We divided 3-month post-stroke patients into PSND and PSD groups based on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and the activity of daily living (ADL). Thirty-one patients with AD and thirty-two healthy controls (HCs) were also recruited. Ten gait parameters in one single and two dual-task gait tests (counting-backward or naming-animals while walking) were compared among the groups, with adjustment for baseline demographic covariates and the MMSE score. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to identify parameters discriminating PSD from individuals with PSND and AD. Patients with PSD and patients with AD showed impaired stride length, velocity, stride time, and cadence while patients with PSD had altered stance and swing phase proportions (all p ≤ 0.01, post hoc). Patients with AD had smaller toe-off (ToA) and heel-to-ground angles (HtA) (p ≤ 0.01) than HCs in dual-task gait tests. Individuals with PSD had a shorter stride length, slower velocity, and altered stance and swing phase percentages in all tests (p ≤ 0.01), but a higher coefficient of variation of stride length (CoVSL) and time (CoVST) only in the naming animals-task gait test (p ≤ 0.001) than individuals with PSND. ToA and HtA in the naming animals-task gait test were smaller in individuals with AD than those with PSD (p ≤ 0.01). Statistical significance persisted after adjusting for demographic covariates, but not for MMSE. The pace and the percentage of stance or swing phase in all tests, CoVST in the dual-task paradigm, and CoVSL only in the naming animals-task gait test (moderate accuracy, AUC > 0.700, p ≤ 0.01) could distinguish PSD from PSND. Furthermore, the ToA and HtA in the naming animals-task gait paradigm discriminated AD from PSD (moderate accuracy, AUC > 0.700, p ≤ 0.01). Thus, specific gait characteristics could allow early identification of PSD and may allow non-invasive discrimination between PSD and AD, or even other subtypes of dementia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Aging NeuroscienceSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207