MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391610059 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2024.1284236

Adaptive auditory assistance for stride length cadence modification in older adults and people with Parkinson’s

2024· article· en· W4391610059 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tina L. Y. Wu, Anna Murphy, Chao Chen, Dana Kulić

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
KeywordsCadenceGaitTask (project management)Computer scienceHabituationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSTRIDEPerceptionMetric (unit)PsychologyNeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gait rehabilitation using auditory cues can help older adults and people with Parkinson's improve walking performance. While auditory cues are convenient and can reliably modify gait cadence, it is not clear if auditory cues can reliably modify stride length (SL), another key gait performance metric. Existing algorithms also do not address habituation or fluctuation in motor capability, and have not been evaluated with target populations or under dual-task conditions. In this study, we develop an adaptive auditory cueing framework that aims to modulate SL and cadence. The framework monitors the gait parameters and learns a personalized cue-response model to relate the gait parameters to the input cues. The cue-response model is represented using a multi-output Gaussian Process (MOGP) and is used during optimization to select the cue to provide. The adaptive cueing approach is benchmarked against the fixed approach, where cues are provided at a fixed cadence. The two approaches are tested under single and dual-task conditions with 13 older adults (OA) and 8 people with Parkinson's (PwP). The results show that more than half of the OA and PwP in the study can change both SL and cadence using auditory cues. The fixed approach is best at changing people's gait without secondary task, however, the addition of the secondary task significantly degrades effectiveness at changing SL. The adaptive approach can maintain the same level of SL change regardless of the presence of the secondary task. A separate analysis is conducted to identify factors that influence the performance of the adaptive framework. Gait information from the previous time step, along with the previous input cue, can improve its prediction accuracy. More diversity in the initialization data can also improve the GP model. Finally, we did not find a strong correlation between stride length and cadence when the parameters are contingent upon input cues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysiologySame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207