Quantitative analysis of balance function characteristics in older patients with mild to moderate cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive decline in older adults may affect balance function, but the relationship between the two is not fully understood, especially in the early stages of cognitive impairment. Mild to moderate cognitive impairment can be assessed with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA). AIM: This study quantitatively analyzed balance function in older adults with mild to moderate cognitive impairment using computerized dynamic posturography (CDP) testing. METHODS: 248 older patients were divided into a cognitive impaired group (MOCA <26, n = 126) and a normal group (MOCA ≥26, n = 122) based on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) Beijing Version. Patients underwent CDP testing, which included the sensory organization test (SOT) and the limits of stability test (LOS). RESULTS: The cognitive impaired group had significantly lower SOT composite and visual scores, as well as reaction time (RT), movement velocity (MVL), endpoint excursion (EPE), maximum excursion (MXE), and directional control (DCL) of the LOS test. Binary logistic regression analysis revealed that RT and MXE were independent factors significantly associated with MOCA, even after adjustment for age and sex. CONCLUSIONS: Older patients with mild to moderate cognitive impairment may have reduced sensory integration and balance stability limits, mainly manifested as prolonged motor reaction time and shortened maximum movement distance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".