MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7008227623

Associations between mobility capacity and walking performance in community-dwelling older people with outdoor walking limitations

2022· dissertation· en· W7008227623 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDecision Support System Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadenceLinear regressionModerationTest (biology)Preferred walking speedRegression analysisOlder peopleTimed Up and Go testVariance (accounting)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Walking is the most common physical activity reported by Canadian adults. Community-ambulation requires many skills such as muscle strength, balance, endurance along with other factors. Clinicians use capacity tests to measure physical abilities to better understand the relationship between what people can do (capacity) and what people really do in their daily lives (performance). Our objective was to determine individual and collective relationships between mobility capacity and walking performance to better understand how to use and interpret tests of capacity in clinical situations. Methods: This study was a secondary data analysis. Baseline data from 168 participants (≥63 years of age) of the GO-OUT study, conducted in 4 Canadian cities (Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto, and Montreal), were analyzed. The multiple linear regression analyses included mobility capacity tests (6-minute Walk Test (6MWT), comfortable 10-metre Walk Test (10mWT), 30-second Sit-to-Stand (30sSTS) and Mini-BESTest); and walking performance measures collected with 7-day accelerometry (peak 30-minute cadence, time walked in bouts and steps/day). Frailty status data were used to test for a moderation effect. Results: Outcomes from multiple linear regression models with single capacity measures demonstrated that tests of capacity were positively related with walking performance measures, however they explained only a small amount of the variance in peak 30-minute cadence (24-28%), time walked in bouts (12-17%), and steps/day (18-22%). Analyses of the combined capacity measures using multiple linear regression demonstrated larger amounts of variance were explained in all walking performance measures (peak 30-minute cadence R2 =37%, with 6MWT and 30sSTS significant; time walked in bouts R2 =19%, with 10mWT significant; steps/day R2=25%, with 30sSTS significant; all p ≤ 0.05). Frailty did not moderate any relationships. Conclusion: The 6MWT and 30sSTS are significantly associated with peak 30-minute cadence, which is said to represent the best natural effort in daily life. These two tests assess different aspects of physical capacity and physiotherapists may use them to better understand walking performance of their clients to plan and evaluate treatment progress.

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.

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), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.191 · 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