Ankle flexor/extensor strength and muscle density are complementary determinants of balance during dual‐task engagement: The ankle quality study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background This study investigated relative contributions of ankle flexor torque, muscle size, and density on balance and falls. Methods Men and women ≥50 years of age completed a peripheral quantitative computed tomography scan of the mid‐leg to quantify muscle density (MD) and cross‐sectional area; Biodex dynamometry to evaluate maximal isometric ankle flexor torque; and a single‐leg balance test on a force platform with/without eyes closed and cognitive task. Ankle flexor torque, muscle size, and density individually, together, or as interactions were examined for associations with balance (mean step duration, steps/trial) in general linear models, or with falls in Poisson regression, adjusting for age, sex, BMI, glucocorticoid use, osteoarthritis, and physical activity. Visuo‐cognitive conditions were compared. Results Among 105 participants (age: 63.3 ± 9.9 years, BMI: 25.8 ± 5.4 kg/m2, 77.1% female), 41.8% experienced ≥1 fall in the last year. Balance on one leg was dependent on ankle flexor torque when eyes were open (r = −0.220 to −0.284) and on having leaner mid‐leg muscles when eyes were closed (r = −0.123 to −0.142); cognitive challenge blunted these correlations. Individuals with leaner muscles tended to rely more on plantarflexors than dorsiflexors. A 2% lower step‐free fraction in the eyes‐closed paradigm associated with having 1 additional fall [−0.701(−1.235, −0.167)], but neither torque, muscle density, nor size related to number of falls. Conclusions Among ambulatory adults, ankle flexor torque and muscle density showed an interactive influence on balance that depended on visuo‐cognitive input. The complementary roles of torque and muscle density on balance suggest redundancy is important under dual‐tasking 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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".