Sensory Reweighting for Postural Control in Older Adults with Age-Related Hearing Loss
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is growing evidence linking hearing impairments and the deterioration of postural stability in older adults. To our knowledge, however, no study to date has investigated the effect of age-related hearing loss on the sensory reweighting process during postural control. In the absence of data, much is unknown about the possible mechanisms, both deleterious and compensatory, that could underly the deterioration of postural control following hearing loss in the elderly. The aim of this study was to empirically examine sensory reweighting for postural control in older adults with age-related hearing loss as compared to older adults with normal hearing. The center of pressure of all participants was recorded using a force platform and the modified clinical test of sensory interaction and balance protocol. The results suggest that individuals with age-related hearing loss displayed increased somatosensory reliance relative to normal hearing younger adults. This increased reliance on somatosensory input does not appear to be effective in mitigating the loss of postural control, probably due to the concomitant deterioration of tactile and proprioceptive sensitivity and acuity associated with aging. Beyond helping to further define the role of auditory perception in postural control, these results further the understanding of sensory-related mechanisms associated with postural instability in older adults.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".