Respective and Combined Effects of Impairments in Sensorimotor Systems and Cognition on Gait Performance: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Respective and combined effects of impairments in sensorimotor systems and cognition on gait performance have not been fully studied. This study aims to describe the respective effects of impairments in muscle strength, distance vision, lower-limb proprioception and cognition on the Timed Up & Go (TUG) scores (i.e., performed TUG [pTUG], imagined TUG [iTUG] and the time difference between these two tests [delta TUG]) in older community-dwellers; and to examine their combined effects on TUG scores. METHODS: Based on a cross-sectional design, 1792 community-dwellers (70.2 ± 4.8 years; 53.6% female) were recruited. Gait performance was assessed using pTUG, iTUG and delta TUG. Participants were divided into healthy individuals and 15 subgroups of individuals according to the presence of impairment in one or more subsystems involved in gait control (i.e., muscle strength and/or distance vision and/or lower-limb proprioception and/or cognition [episodic memory and executive performance]). Impairment in muscle strength, distance vision and lower-limb proprioception was defined as being in the lowest tertile of performance. Impairment in cognition was defined as abnormal episodic memory and executive tests. RESULTS: A total of 191 (10.7%) exhibited impairment in muscle strength, 188 (10.5%) in distance vision, 302 (16.9%) in lower-limb proprioception, and 42 (2.3%) in cognition. Linear regressions showed that cognitive impairment as well as dual combinations of impairments were associated with increased pTUG (P<0.02). Impairment in lower-limb proprioception was associated with decreased iTUG (P=0.015). All combinations of impairments, except those including muscle strength and the combinations of the 4 subsystems, were associated with increased delta TUG (P<0.04). CONCLUSION: Cognitive integrity is central for efficient gait control and stability, whereas lower-limb proprioception seems to be central for gait imagery.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".