Lower-Body Positive Pressure Treadmill Training for Pediatric Gait Disorders: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this scoping review was to examine the literature on the use of anti-gravity treadmills and its effects on lower-limb motor functions in children and adolescents with locomotor impairments. Method: Four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science) were searched for articles from inception to August 2021. Inclusion criteria were: (1) experimental or quasi-experimental studies using anti-gravity training as the primary intervention; (2) studies conducted in pediatric participants; (3) articles reporting outcomes related to lower-limb functions; and (4) studies published in French or English. Results: Fifteen articles were included in the review. Studies included children and adolescents aged 4–18 years with locomotor impairments. Intervention duration ranged from 2 to 12 weeks, with 2–5 sessions per week. Included studies reported that anti-gravity training induces improvements in muscle strength, balance, spatiotemporal gait parameters, and walking endurance in children with locomotor impairments. Conclusion: This review provides relevant information about interventions, outcomes and limits associated with anti-gravity training in pediatrics. Overall, anti-gravity treadmill training could be viewed as a valuable training modality, specifically for children with cerebral palsy. However, a more precise and comprehensive description of anti-gravity training protocols would be useful.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".