MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313492828 · doi:10.1080/00222895.2022.2137099

Relationship Between Dual-Task Walking and Level of Conflict Between Gait and Concurrent Tasks in Adolescents

2023· article· en· W4313492828 on OpenAlex
Eda Çınar, Bradford J. McFadyen, Isabelle Gagnon

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Motor Behavior · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadenceGaitTask (project management)PsychologySTRIDEPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRepeated measures designAnalysis of varianceMathematicsStatisticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to determine the role of resource conflict in dual-task (DT) effects on gait and concurrent tasks in children and adolescents. Gait was evaluated with and without concurrent tasks (visual-manual, visual-vocal and auditory-vocal). The roles of condition (single vs dual) and type of concurrent task in DT effect were tested by Repeated Measured of ANOVA. Relative changes from single to DT conditions were compared using One-Way ANOVA. There were significant reductions in gait speed, cadence, and stride length, and increases in double support time, step time and variability in step time, and no change in variability in stride length, step width, and concurrent task performance from single to DT conditions. DT effects on gait parameters and concurrent tasks were comparable across DT conditions.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.201 · 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