Gait Disturbances in Older Adults With Cerebral Small Vessel Disease: Mixed Methods Study Using Smartphone Sensors and Video Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) significantly impacts motor functions, particularly gait dynamics. However, its analysis often lacks the integration of comprehensive tools that capture the multifaceted nature of gait disturbances. Traditional methods may not fully address the complexity of CSVD's impact on gait, underscoring the need for a detailed exploration of gait characteristics through advanced technological means. Objective: This study aims to identify the distinct gait patterns and postural adaptations present in patients with CSVD compared to a healthy older population, using an integrative analysis combining sensor and video data to provide a holistic understanding of gait dynamics in CSVD. Methods: This study involved 90 participants older than 50 years (mean age 68.85, SD 9.74 years; 47 males and 43 females), with 24 categorized as normal controls (mean age 66.42, SD 7.51 years) and 66 diagnosed with CSVD (mean age 69.74, SD 10.37 years). Participants performed three walking tasks: normal walking, dual-task walking (with concurrent mental arithmetic), and fast walking. Gait parameters were collected through video data for image posture parameters using the OpenPose BODY_25 key point model, and the "Pocket Gait Test" smartphone app for sensor-based parameters sampled at approximately 40 Hz. Data analysis included 5 sensor-based parameters (step frequency, root mean square (RMS), step variability, step regularity, and step symmetry) and 6 key video-based parameters (including knee angle, ankle angle, elbow angle, body trunk angles, and head posture). Results: Among the 29 participants with complete sensor and video data (10 normal controls and 19 patients with CSVD), significant differences were observed in step regularity (normal walking: mean 0.76, SD 0.09 vs mean 0.61, SD 0.25; P<.003 and dual-task: mean 0.74, SD 0.13 vs mean 0.57 SD 0.24; P<.005), RMS (normal walking: mean 1.64, SD 0.45 vs mean 1.43, SD 0.42; P<.006), and forward head posture angles (head-to-body angle during normal walking: mean 132.96, SD 7.78 vs mean 128.07, SD 7.99; P<.02 and head-to-ground angle: mean 134.11, SD 8.28 vs mean 128.40, SD 9.75; P<.008) between the CSVD and control groups. The CSVD group exhibited a more pronounced forward head posture across all walking tasks, with the greatest difference observed during dual-task walking (head-to-ground angle: mean 134.43, SD 8.29 vs mean 125.02, SD 8.42; P<.02). Conclusions: The study provides compelling evidence of distinct gait disturbances in patients with CSVD, characterized by reduced step regularity (15%-23% lower than controls), altered acceleration patterns, and significant postural adaptations, particularly forward head positioning (4°-7° more pronounced than controls). These quantifiable differences, detectable through accessible smartphone and video technology, offer potential biomarkers for early CSVD detection and monitoring. The integration of sensor and video analysis provides a more comprehensive assessment approach that could be implemented in both clinical and home settings for longitudinal monitoring of disease progression and rehabilitation outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".