Automated Shoulder Girdle Rigidity Assessment in Parkinson’s Disease via an Integrated Model- and Data-Driven Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parkinson’s disease (PD) is characterized by motor symptoms, with key diagnostic features, such as rigidity, traditionally assessed through subjective clinical scales. This study proposes a novel hybrid framework integrating model-driven biomechanical features (damping ratio, decay rate) and data-driven statistical features (maximum detail coefficient) from wearable sensor data during a modified pendulum test to quantify shoulder girdle rigidity objectively. Using weak supervision, these features were unified to generate robust labels from limited data, achieving a 10% improvement in PD/healthy control classification accuracy (0.71 vs. 0.64) over data-driven methods and matching model-driven performance (0.70). The damping ratio and decay rate, aligning with Wartenberg pendulum test metrics like relaxation index, revealed velocity-dependent aspects of rigidity, challenging its clinical characterization as velocity-independent. Outputs correlated strongly with UPDRS rigidity scores (r = 0.78, p < 0.001), validating their clinical utility as novel biomechanical biomarkers. This framework enhances interpretability and scalability, enabling remote, objective rigidity assessment for early diagnosis and telemedicine, advancing PD management through innovative sensor-based neurotechnology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".