Influence of a Three-Month Mixed Reality Training on Gait Speed and Cognitive Functions in Adults with Intellectual Disability: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People with intellectual disability (ID) are often subject to motor impairments such as altered gait. As gait is a task involving motor and perceptive dimensions, perceptual-motor training is an efficient rehabilitation approach to reduce the risk of falls which grows with age. Virtual, augmented, and mixed reality are recent tools which enable interaction with 3D elements at different levels of immersion and interaction. In view of the countless possibilities that this opens, their use for therapeutic purposes is constantly increasing. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the influence a mixed reality activity could have on motor and cognitive abilities in eighteen adults with intellectual disability. For three months, once a week, they had around 20 min to pop virtual balloons with a finger using a Microsoft HoloLens2® head-mounted mixed-reality device. Motor skills were assessed through gait analysis and cognitive abilities were measured with the Montréal Cognitive Assessment. Both walking speed and cognitive score increased after training. In conclusion, this study demonstrates that mixed reality holds potential to get used for therapeutic purposes in adults with ID.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".