MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Postural control imbalance in individuals with a minor lower extremity amputation: a scoping review protocol.

2025· review· en· W4408156334 on OpenAlexafffund
Maxime Acien, Ahmed Dami, Virginie Blanchette, Gabriel Moisan

Bibliographic record

VenueF1000Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-NationaleCentres Intégré Universitaires de Santé et de Services SociauxUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresCegep de Trois-Rivieres
FundersUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
KeywordsOpen peer reviewPlant biologyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationProtocol (science)AmputationMinor (academic)Physical therapyNeuroscienceBioinformaticsPhysiologyPsychologyBiologySurgeryAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Lower extremity amputations (LEA) impact the quality of life and physical abilities and increase the risk of developing secondary complications. While most research focuses on major LEA, minor LEA remain understudied despite their rising incidence. These amputations alter the sensorial and mechanical properties of the foot, affecting postural control and stability. Understanding these biomechanical changes is essential for improving rehabilitation strategies. Objectives: The scoping review will synthesize current research on postural control deficits following a minor LEA, focusing on any resections through or distal to the ankle joint. It will also evaluate whether interventions, such as orthotic devices and balance rehabilitation programs, have been investigated to mitigate balance impairments in this population. Inclusion criteria: The scoping review will include studies on individuals with a minor LEA, across various age, levels, and etiologies. The scoping review will focus on quantitative data related to standing balance and postural control, dynamic functional tests, and self-reported questionnaires on balance capacity and confidence. Studies assessing interventions for postural control restoration will be analyzed separately as a secondary outcome. Methods: A preliminary search of MEDLINE (PubMed) was conducted to develop a full search strategy aimed at compiling all existing scientific articles on postural control and balance in individuals with a minor LEA. The subsequent comprehensive search will be performed across multiple databases and grey literature. Two independent reviewers will independently extract the data. The Joanna Briggs Institute Quality Assessment Tool will be used to assess risk of bias and quality of included studies. Discussion: By mapping the literature on postural control in individuals with a minor LEA, the scoping review will highlight knowledge gaps and provide guidelines for future biomechanical and postural research protocols. It will also assess the current state of therapeutic intervention research as a secondary outcome, providing insights for clinical rehabilitation strategies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.268
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.360 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueF1000ResearchSame topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207