MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401767128 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0338581

Comparison of Methods for Determining Parameters Related to Ankle Joint Quasi-Stiffness During Quiet Standing

2024· preprint· en· W4401767128 on OpenAlexafffund
Kaylie Lau, Jonguk Lee, Kai Lon Fok, Kei Masani

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsQUIETJoint (building)AnkleStiffnessJoint stiffnessMathematicsMedicinePhysicsStructural engineeringEngineeringAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ankle joint quasi-stiffness is a measure representing the control of quiet standing. Here we investigated three methods for determining parameters associated with ankle joint quasi-stiffness. Eleven healthy, young males were asked to stand quietly with eyes open (EO) and eyes closed (EC). Ankle joint quasi-stiffness was computed using two methods, one proposed by Winter et al. (Winter DA, et al. J Neurophysiol 80: 1211-1221, 1998) ([Formula: see text]) and another by Loram and Lakie (Loram ID, et al. J Physiol 540: 1111-1124, 2002) ([Formula: see text]). Both values were normalized using participants' body sizes. The short-term scaling exponent in stabilogram diffusion analysis ([Formula: see text]), which has been linked to quasi-stiffness, was applied. A two-way repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant main effect of methodology (p < 0.0001, partial η² = 0.42), but no significant effect of eye condition (p = 0.1947, partial η² = 0.06), nor interaction effect (p = 0.4742, partial η² = 0.02). Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC(3,1)) analysis indicates good reliability between [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] with an ICC value of 0.858 (p < 0.001) in the EO condition, and moderate reliability with an ICC value of 0.718 (p = 0.004) in the EC condition. [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] exhibited a very strong negative correlation in the EO ([Formula: see text] = -0.909) condition and a moderately strong negative correlation in the EC ([Formula: see text] = -0.782) condition. [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] exhibited moderately strong negative correlation in both the EO ([Formula: see text] = -0.664) and EC ([Formula: see text] = -0.555) conditions. The good and moderate reliability between [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] suggests that both measures capture similar stiffness attributes relating to their neuro-mechanical components, despite a significant methodological difference. Additionally, relatively high correlations of [Formula: see text] with [Formula: see text] and with [Formula: see text] suggest that the stochastic characteristics of centre of pressure in the short period indeed reflect the overall quasi-stiffness at the ankle joint.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207