MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312202405 · doi:10.3390/app13010302

Predicting the Onset of Freezing of Gait Using EEG Dynamics

2022· article· en· W4312202405 on OpenAlexaff
Alka Rachel John, Zehong Cao, Hsiang‐Ting Chen, Kaylena A. Ehgoetz Martens, Matthew Georgiades, Moran Gilat, Hung T. Nguyen, Simon J.G. Lewis, Chin‐Teng Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchAustralian Research Council
KeywordsElectroencephalographyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGaitTurnoverPsychologyWork (physics)Computer scienceAudiologyMedicineNeuroscienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Freezing of gait (FOG) severely incapacitates the mobility of patients with advanced Parkinson’s disease (PD). An accurate prediction of the onset of FOG could improve the quality of life for PD patients. However, it is imperative to distinguish the possibility of the onset of FOG from that of voluntary stopping. Our previous work demonstrated the neurological differences between the transition to FOG and voluntary stopping using electroencephalogram (EEG) signals. We employed a timed up-and-go (TUG) task to elicit FOG in PD patients. Some of these TUG tasks had an additional voluntary stopping component, where participants stopped walking based on verbal instruction to “stop”. The performance of the convolutional neural network (CNN) in identifying the transition to FOG from normal walking and the transition to voluntary stopping was explored. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first study to propose a deep learning method to distinguish the transition to FOG from the transition to voluntary stop in PD patients. The models, trained on the EEG data from 17 PD patients who manifested FOG episodes, considering a short two-second transition window for FOG occurrence or voluntary stopping, achieved close to 75% classification accuracy in distinguishing transition to FOG from the transition to voluntary stopping or normal walking. Our results represent an important step toward advanced EEG-based cueing systems for smart FOG intervention, excluding the potential confounding of voluntary stopping.

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 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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207