MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7020959958

Modulation of various stepping movement parameters during perturbed walking at specific periods of the gait cycle

2000· other· en· W7020959958 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2000
Typeother
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSagittal planeGaitBalance (ability)Gait cycleDisplacement (psychology)BarefootCoronal planeHeelPreferred walking speed
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the corrective responses of the healthy adults in both sagittal and frontal planes during unexpected disturbances while walking. The purpose of the study was to examine which parameters are modified in both sagittal and frontal planes. Ten active healthy adults participated in the study. Walking was perturbed using a movable platform installed in the middle of a walkway. The types of balance disturbances included backward translation and forward translation in the sagittal plane. These were presented at different points of the gait cycle, specifically during the single support phase, just after right heel off and just after heel strike. The corrective balance responses o bilateral gluteus medius, adductor magnus, rectus femoris, hamstrings, anterior tibialis and gastrocneumius were analyzed. The trajectories of center of mass (CM) relative to space CM(S) were quantified to compare task performance levels between perturbed walking and unperturbed walking condition. The timing, phase changes in the trajectories of angular displacement, CM displacement relative to foot CM(F) were examined in sagittal and frontal planes. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→