Aging Delays Completion of Head Rotation Cycles in Continuous Gaze Stabilization Exercises despite Putative Healthy Vestibular Function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Aging is associated with loss of balance, with falls being one of the leading causes of death among the elderly in the USA. Gaze stabilization exercises (GSE) improve balance control in vestibular populations and could be useful to prevent falls in healthy individuals. However, the extent to which aging affects head kinematics in GSE is unknown. METHODS: Forty-eight younger (n = 25, 24 ± 6 years, 60% female) and older (n = 23, 66 ± 5 years, 56% female) adults completed six 30-s GSE. Participants were asked to maintain gaze fixation on a stationary target while continuously performing head movements in pitch (e.g., vertical) and yaw (e.g., horizontal) directions. The visual target was placed on the wall 1 m or 2 m away or handheld at arm's length. Head kinematics were recorded with an inertial measurement unit placed on the back of the participants' head. RESULTS: Older adults took significantly more time (e.g., delay) to complete cycles of head rotation in both pitch and yaw compared to younger participants across all GSE. Such delay was further increased during yaw head rotation while fixating gaze of the 1 m target. The average peak velocity (APV) and average angular displacement (AAD), however, were equivalent between groups in all GSE. CONCLUSION: Aging leads to the maintenance of head rotation APV and AAD at the expense of delayed cycles of head rotation, suggesting an age-dependent prioritization strategy (e.g., adapt duration first, range second) during continuous head movements. The distance of the visual target and head movement direction influenced elderly performance and should be considered when prescribing GSE to older populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".