Effect of Unilateral Shoulder Disorder on the Stance Phase of Human Gait
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Gait analysis systems serve as important tools for assessing disturbed gait patterns. Amongst other factors, functional limitations of the shoulder joint may relate to such disturbances. Patient-reported outcome measures, assessment of pain, and active range of motion are commonly used to describe shoulder impairment. Purpose. The aim of this cohort study was to evaluate the impact of unilateral limitations of shoulder mobility and pain on gait patterns and to detect correlations between pain, shoulder mobility, and particular phases of human gait using a Zebris gait analysis system. Methods. 20 subjects with unilaterally restricted mobility and pain of the affected shoulder and a control group of 10 healthy subjects underwent a gait analysis. Various gait parameters, the DASH score, pain at rest and movement of the affected shoulder, and the active range of motion (aROM) for shoulder flexion and abduction were recorded. Results. We determined significant differences of the duration of the loading response ( p = 0.021), midstance ( p = 0.033), and the terminal stance phase ( p = 0.019) between the shoulder group and the control group, with a shorter loading response phase and a longer terminal stance phase of the affected side in the shoulder group. In the shoulder group, we found significant correlations between the DASH and the duration of the midstance phase ( p = 0.023) and the terminal stance phase ( p = 0.038). In addition, there was a significant correlation between shoulder flexion and the duration of the midstance phase ( p = 0.047).
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".