MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237796327 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-22139/v1

Gait Kinematics of Patients with Lateral Collateral Ligament Injuries of Ankle

2020· preprint· en· W4237796327 on OpenAlexaff
Bin Zheng, Xin Liu, Dezheng Zhang, Qinwei Guo, Zhongshi Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square (Research Square) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Science and Technology BeijingChina Scholarship CouncilBeijing Association for Science and TechnologyNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAnkleSTRIDESwingKinematicsLigamentPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGaitMedicineFoot (prosody)Gait analysisPower walkingPreferred walking speedPhysical therapySurgeryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Lateral collateral ligament (LCL) injuries of ankle are a common problem in sports medicine. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the walking kinematics in patients with LCL injuries of ankle for examining how ankle ligament injuries affect foot and ankle motion. The results will serve in precision assessment and computer-aided diagnosis. Methods Kinematics of walking were assessed by the Heidelberg Foot Measurement Model (HFMM) in 6 adults (3 patients, 3 control subjects). We hypothesized that patients with ligament injury will: present a shorter stance phase, but longer swing phase; be observed with an increasing number of shank and foot adjustments during the stance phase; reduce velocity of foot during the early swing phase with an increasing variation. Velocity profiles and micro-adjustment of knee, ankle, and foot were calculated during different gait phases and compared between two different subject groups by independent-sample t-test with 95% confidence intervals and standard error of measurements. Results In the gait cycle, 1 st rocker phase was 2.09% shorter (p < 0.001) and 2 nd rocker phase was 1.54% longer (p = 0.009) in patients than in controls. Compared to control subjects, the patients showed 89.1 mm shorter stride length (p<0.001), 0.10s slower stride (p<0.001) and 1.57 more complex micro-adjustments in 2 nd rocker phase than in other rocker/swing phases during natural walking (p=0.017). The mean velocity of knee (6.05 mm/10 -2 s vs. 4.74 mm/10 -2 s), ankle (0.85 mm/10 -2 s vs. 0.52 mm/10 -2 s), midfoot (0.79 mm/10 -2 s vs. 0.48 mm/10 -2 s) and forefoot (1.72 mm/10 -2 s vs. 0.97 mm/10 -2 s) in 2 nd rocker was significantly higher in patients (p<0.001). Conclusion Our findings revealed the human motion compensatory mechanism. Patients with ligament injuries need more musculoskeletal adjustments to keeping body balance than control subjects. Precise descriptions of the kinematics are crucial for clinical assessment before and after surgical management. These results will also provide a foundation for computer-aided diagnosis in the future. Key Terms ankle ligaments, gait analysis, Heidelberg Foot Measurement Model, foot and ankle kinematics, phase/rocker, physical therapy/rehabilitation.

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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square (Research Square)Same topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207