MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Establishing a threshold for total joint moment asymmetry in asymptomatic adults

2025· article· en· W4406940326 on OpenAlexafffund
Carson Halliwell, Janie L. Astephen Wilson, Derek Rutherford, Aleksandra R. Budarick, Meaghan Hannigan, R. Moyer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Arthritis NetworkArthritis Society
KeywordsAsymptomaticAsymmetryJoint (building)Moment (physics)MedicinePhysicsInternal medicineEngineeringStructural engineeringClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gait analysis is a fundamental tool for understanding joint function and identifying asymmetries in joint moments, which can signal underlying pathologies or potential risk factors for joint damage. Despite the widespread use of symmetry analysis in assessing gait across various conditions, including osteoarthritis and post-injury recovery, there remains no clear objective evidence on joint moment symmetry in healthy adults to serve as a comparison for pathological populations. This study aimed to define the range of joint moment asymmetry during walking in healthy adults. Twenty-one asymptomatic individuals aged 40 years and older underwent three-dimensional gait analysis at a self-selected walking speed. The total knee joint moment was calculated as a composite measure of the net external knee frontal, sagittal, and transverse moments, and absolute inter-limb asymmetry in the total knee joint moment was calculated for all participants. Paired samples t-tests were used to assess for differences in total knee joint, frontal, sagittal, and transverse moments between knees. No significant differences in any knee joint moment outcomes were found between knees. Findings indicated that the upper limit of absolute total joint moment asymmetry in asymptomatic individuals was 14 %. The establishment of this threshold provides a critical reference for clinicians and researchers to identify asymmetries that may deviate from healthy adult ranges.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.273 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of BiomechanicsSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207