Evaluating the ability of a predictive vision-based machine learning model to measure changes in gait in response to medication and DBS within individuals with Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Gait impairments in Parkinson’s disease (PD) are treated with dopaminergic medication or deep-brain stimulation (DBS), although the magnitude of the response is variable between individuals. Computer vision-based approaches have previously been evaluated for measuring the severity of parkinsonian gait in videos, but have not been evaluated for their ability to identify changes within individuals in response to treatment. This pilot study examines whether a vision-based model, trained on videos of parkinsonism, is able to detect improvement in parkinsonian gait in people with PD in response to medication and DBS use. Methods A spatial–temporal graph convolutional model was trained to predict MDS-UPDRS-gait scores in 362 videos from 14 older adults with drug-induced parkinsonism. This model was then used to predict MDS-UPDRS-gait scores on a different dataset of 42 paired videos from 13 individuals with PD, recorded while ON and OFF medication and DBS treatment during the same clinical visit. Statistical methods were used to assess whether the model was responsive to changes in gait in the ON and OFF states. Results The MDS-UPDRS-gait scores predicted by the model were lower on average (representing improved gait; p = 0.017, Cohen’s d = 0.495) during the ON medication and DBS treatment conditions. The magnitude of the differences between ON and OFF state was significantly correlated between model predictions and clinician annotations (p = 0.004). The predicted scores were significantly correlated with the clinician scores (Kendall’s tau-b = 0.301, p = 0.010), but were distributed in a smaller range as compared to the clinician scores. Conclusion A vision-based model trained on parkinsonian gait did not accurately predict MDS-UPDRS-gait scores in a different PD cohort, but detected weak, but statistically significant proportional changes in response to medication and DBS use. Large, clinically validated datasets of videos captured in many different settings and treatment conditions are required to develop accurate vision-based models of parkinsonian gait.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".