Exploring the challenges of avoiding collisions with virtual pedestrians using a dual-task paradigm in individuals with chronic moderate to severe traumatic brain injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Individuals with a moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (m/sTBI), despite good locomotor recovery after six months post-injury, face challenges in adapting locomotion to the environment. They also present with altered cognitive functions, which may impact dual-task walking abilities. Whether they present collision avoidance strategies with moving pedestrians that are altered under dual-task conditions, however, remains unclear. This study aimed to compare between individuals with m/sTBI and age-matched control individuals: (1), the locomotor and cognitive costs associated with the concurrent performance of circumventing approaching virtual pedestrians (VRPs) while attending to an auditory-based cognitive task and; (2) gaze behaviours associated with VRP circumvention task between single and dual-task conditions. Methodology: Twelve individuals with m/sTBI (age=43.3±9.5 yrs; >6 mo. post injury) and 12 healthy controls (CTLs) (age=41.8±8.3 yrs) were assessed while walking in a virtual subway station viewed in a head-mounted display. They performed a collision avoidance task with VRPs, as well as auditory-based cognitive tasks (pitch discrimination and auditory Stroop), both under single and dual-task conditions. Dual-task cost (DTC) for onset distance of trajectory deviation, minimum distance from the VRP, maximum lateral deviation, walking speed, gaze fixations and cognitive task accuracy were contrasted between groups using generalized estimating equations. Results: In contrast to CTLs who showed locomotor DTCs only, individuals with m/sTBI displayed both locomotor and cognitive DTCs. While both groups walked slower under dual-task conditions, only individuals with m/sTBI failed to modify their onset distance of trajectory deviation and maintained smaller minimum distances and smaller maximum lateral deviation compared to single-task walking. Both groups showed shorter gaze fixations on the approaching VRP under dual-task conditions, but this reduction was less pronounced in the individuals with m/sTBI. A reduction in cognitive task accuracy under dual-task conditions was found in the m/sTBI group only. Conclusion: Individuals with m/sTBI present altered locomotor and gaze behaviours as well as cognitive performances when executing a collision avoidance task involving moving pedestrians, especially under dual-task conditions. Potential mechanisms explaining those alterations are discussed. Present findings highlight the compromised complex walking abilities in individuals with m/sTBI who otherwise present a good locomotor recovery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".