MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390115453 · doi:10.1136/pn-2023-003917

Neurological gait assessment

2023· article· en· W4390115453 on OpenAlex

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

VenuePractical Neurology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre for Movement Disorders
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGaitParkinsonismPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGait AtaxiaGait DisturbanceMedicineAtaxiaMovement disordersParkinson's diseaseNeurological examinationDiseasePsychologyPhysical therapyPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gait disorders are a common feature of neurological disease. The gait examination is an essential part of the neurological clinical assessment, providing valuable clues to a myriad of causes. Understanding how to examine gait is not only essential for neurological diagnosis but also for treatment and prognosis. Here, we review aspects of the clinical history and examination of neurological gait to help guide gait disorder assessment. We focus particularly on how to differentiate between common gait abnormalities and highlight the characteristic features of the more prevalent neurological gait patterns such as ataxia, waddling, steppage, spastic gait, Parkinson's disease and functional gait disorders. We also offer diagnostic clues for some unusual gait presentations, such as dystonic, stiff-person and choreiform gait, along with red flags that help differentiate atypical parkinsonism from Parkinson's disease.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.002

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.323 · 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