MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400876023 · doi:10.3390/s24144744

The Overlay, a New Solution for Volume Variations in the Residual Limb for Individuals with a Transtibial Amputation

2024· article· en· W4400876023 on OpenAlexafffund
Pierre Badaire, Maxime T. Robert, Katia Turcot

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
FundersInstitut de Réadaptation en Déficience Physique de QuébecMitacs
KeywordsAmputationOverlayResidualVolume (thermodynamics)Residual volumePhysical medicine and rehabilitationComputer scienceArtificial limbsBiomedical engineeringMedicineSurgeryProsthesisArtificial intelligencePhysicsInternal medicineAlgorithmOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The company Ethnocare has developed the Overlay, a new pneumatic solution for managing volumetric variations (VVs) of the residual limb (RL) in transtibial amputees (TTAs), which improves socket fitting. However, the impact of the Overlay during functional tasks and on the comfort and pain felt in the RL is unknown. Methods: 8 TTAs participated in two evaluations, separated by two weeks. We measured compensatory strategies (CS) using spatio-temporal parameters and three-dimensional lower limb kinematics and kinetics during gait and sit-to-stand (STS) tasks. During each visit, the participant carried out our protocol while wearing the Overlay and prosthetic folds (PFs), the most common solution to VV. Between each task, comfort and pain felt were assessed using visual analog scales. Results: While walking, the cadence with the Overlay was 105 steps/min, while it was 101 steps/min with PFs (p = 0.021). During 35% and 55% of the STS cycle, less hip flexion was observed while wearing the Overlay compared to PFs (p = 0.004). We found asymmetry coefficients of 13.9% with the Overlay and 17% with PFs during the STS (p = 0.016) task. Pain (p = 0.031), comfort (p = 0.017), and satisfaction (p = 0.041) were better with the Overlay during the second visit. Conclusion: The Overlay’s impact is similar to PFs’ but provides less pain and better comfort.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207