MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Combination Of Force Plate Posturography And Machine Learning Predicts Fall Risk In Older Adults

2024· article· en· W4402556431 on OpenAlexaff
Jack Z. Jin, Joesph M. Munaretto, Jessica A. Hinman, Jocelyn Rempel, Jared R. Fletcher

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosturographyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePsychologyBalance (ability)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Falls remain the leading cause of injury related hospitalizations, morbidity, and mortality amongst seniors. Additionally, postural instability increases as one ages. As such, a sensitive, reliable, and convenient method for predicting falls among older adults is crucial. Measuring centre of pressure deviation from force plate posturography has been shown to be an effective tool in predicting falls among older adults; however, the addition of machine-learning algorithms have not been directly evaluated. PURPOSE: To develop machine-learning models that can provide clinicians with rapid, objective decision support metrics for fall risk among older adults using force plate posturography. METHODS: Fifty community dwelling older adults completed a two-part test consisting of a Timed up & Go (TUG) portion and a force plate portion. Participants stood on a force plate with their centre of pressure (CoP) displayed on a screen in front of them. They were then prompted to shift their centre of pressure left and right to a box displayed on the screen, aiming to reach and maintain a stable position within the box for approximately 3 seconds. Participants were classified as Fallers (F, TUG≥13.5 s) or Non-Fallers (NF, TUG<13.5 s) and balance metrics were compared between groups. RESULTS: Multiscale vertical entropy (F: 43.9 ± 9.4; NF: 50.0 ± 8.9, p = 0.037), multivariate multiscale entropy (F: 42.2 ± 7.0; NF: 47.2 ± 8.7, p = 0.037), and phase angle variability about the frontal plane (F: 24.0 ± 3.0 rad; NF: 26.2 ± 3.5, p = 0.033) were significantly lower in F compared to NF. No other calculated balance metrics were significantly different between groups. The developed machine-learning algorithm was able to correctly classify fallers and non-fallers (AUC = 0.73). CONCLUSION: Fallers may have a reduced ability to make fine adjustments in their movement in order to maintain balance compared to non-fallers. F can be classified based on three metrics largely related to the complexity of movement and the inability to control small, complex movements of the centre of pressure. Individuals at risk of falls can be classified objectively using machine-learning analysis of force plate posturography. Supported by Mount Royal University's Innovation Fund Grant

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)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→