MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392987974 · doi:10.2196/55178

Using In-Shoe Inertial Measurement Unit Sensors to Understand Daily-Life Gait Characteristics in Patients With Distal Radius Fractures During 6 Months of Recovery: Cross-Sectional Study

2024· article· en· W4392987974 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Akiko Yamamoto, Eriku Yamada, Takuya Ibara, Fumiyuki Nihey, Takuma Inai, Kazuya Tsukamoto, Tomohiko Waki, Toshitaka Yoshii, Yoshiyuki Kobayashi, Kentaro Nakahara, Koji Fujita

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsMedicineGaitPhysical therapySTRIDEActivities of daily livingPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGrip strengthGait analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A distal radius fracture (DRF) is a common initial fragility fracture among women in their early postmenopausal period, which is associated with an increased risk of subsequent fractures. Gait assessments are valuable for evaluating fracture risk; inertial measurement units (IMUs) have been widely used to assess gait under free-living conditions. However, little is known about long-term changes in patients with DRF, especially concerning daily-life gait. We hypothesized that, in the long term, the daily-life gait parameters in patients with DRF could enable us to reveal future risk factors for falls and fractures. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the spatiotemporal characteristics of patients with DRF at 4 weeks and 6 months of recovery. METHODS: We recruited 16 women in their postmenopausal period with DRF as their first fragility fracture (mean age 62.3, SD 7.0 years) and 28 matched healthy controls (mean age 65.6, SD 8.0 years). Daily-life gait assessments and physical assessments, such as hand grip strength (HGS), were performed using an in-shoe IMU sensor. Participants' results were compared with those of the control group, and their recovery was assessed for 6 months after the fracture. RESULTS: In the fracture group, at 4 weeks after DRF, lower foot height in the swing phase (P=.049) and higher variability of stride length (P=.03) were observed, which improved gradually. However, the dorsiflexion angle in the fracture group tended to be lower consistently during 6 months (at 4 weeks: P=.06; during 6 months: P=.07). As for the physical assessments, the fracture group showed lower HGS at all time points (at 4 weeks: P<.001; during 6 months: P=.04), despite significant improvement at 6 months (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: With an in-shoe IMU sensor, we discovered the recovery of spatiotemporal gait characteristics 6 months after DRF surgery without the participants' awareness. The consistently unchanged dorsiflexion angle in the swing phase and lower HGS could be associated with fracture risk, implying the high clinical importance of appropriate interventions for patients with DRF to prevent future fractures. These results could be applied to a screening tool for evaluating the risk of falls and fractures, which may contribute to constructing a new health care system using wearable devices in the near future.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→