MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391012058 · doi:10.1109/tnsre.2024.3355429

Force Control Issues in Upper and Lower Limbs in Parkinson’s Disease and Freezing of Gait

2024· article· en· W4391012058 on OpenAlexafffund
C. Aitken, Olivia Samotus, Anish S. Naidu, Mandar Jog, Rajni V. Patel

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchParkinson CanadaCanada Research ChairsAGE-WELLCalifornia HIV/AIDS Research Program
KeywordsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationUpper limbParkinson's diseaseGaitLower limbTask (project management)MedicineLevodopaDiseasePsychologyPhysical therapySurgeryEngineeringInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parkinson's Disease (PD) has been found to cause force control deficits in upper and lower limbs. About 50% of patients with advanced PD develop a debilitating symptom called freezing of gait (FOG), which has been linked to force control problems in the lower limbs, and some may only have a limited response to the gold standard pharmaceutical therapy, levodopa, resulting in partially levodopa-responsive FOG (PLR-FOG). There has been limited research on investigating upper-limb force control in people with PD with PLR-FOG, and without FOG. In this pilot study, force control was explored using an upper-and-lower-limb haptics-enabled robot in a reaching task while people with PD with and without PLR-FOG were on their levodopa medication. A healthy control group was used for reference, and each cohort completed the task at three different levels of assistance provided by the robot. Similar significant proportional force control deficits were found in the upper and lower limbs in patients with PLR-FOG versus those without FOG. Some aspects of force control were found to be retained, including an ability to increase or decrease force in response to changes in resistance while completing a reaching task. Overall, these results suggest there are force control deficits in both the upper and lower limbs in people with PLR-FOG.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation EngineeringSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207