Association of Dual-Task Gait Cost and White Matter Hyperintensity Burden Poststroke: Results From the ONDRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acute change in gait speed while performing a mental task [dual-task gait cost (DTC)], and hyperintensity magnetic resonance imaging signals in white matter are both important disability predictors in older individuals with history of stroke (poststroke). It is still unclear, however, whether DTC is associated with overall hyperintensity volume from specific major brain regions in poststroke. METHODS: This is a cohort study with a total of 123 older (69 ± 7 years of age) participants with history of stroke were included from the Ontario Neurodegenerative Disease Research Initiative. Participants were clinically assessed and had gait performance assessed under single- and dual-task conditions. Structural neuroimaging data were analyzed to measure both, white matter hyperintensity (WMH) and normal appearing volumes. Percentage of WMH volume in frontal, parietal, occipital, and temporal lobes as well as subcortical hyperintensities in basal ganglia + thalamus were the main outcomes. Multivariate models investigated associations between DTC and hyperintensity volumes, adjusted for age, sex, years of education, global cognition, vascular risk factors, APOE4 genotype, residual sensorimotor symptoms from previous stroke and brain volume. RESULTS: = .04), independently of brain atrophy. CONCLUSIONS: In poststroke, increased DTC may be an indicator of larger white matter damages, specifically in subcortical regions, which can potentially affect the overall cognitive processing and decrease gait automaticity by increasing the cortical control over patients' locomotion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".