MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7065419031

The Effect Of Vibratory Noise Input On Postural Responses To An Unexpected Loss Of Balance

2023· other· en· W7065419031 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueBrock University Digital Repository (Brock University) · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoise (video)Balance (ability)QUIETReplicateFoot (prosody)ElectromyographyCentre of pressure
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vibratory noise input applied to the foot sole has been shown to improve static balance control across various populations (i.e., younger adults, older adults, individuals with diabetic neuropathy etc.). However, there is little research on whether vibratory noise improves reactive balance control. This is concerning because falls typically occur when an individual is unable to quickly recover from a loss to their balance. Therefore, the purpose of this thesis was to examine whether vibratory noise input affects postural responses following an unexpected surface translation. A secondary aim was to examine the effects of vibration on static balance performance to replicate previous findings. Eighteen adults (10 females and 8 males) completed six quiet standing trials and 28 surface translation trials. For all trials, participants stood barefoot, while blindfolded and wearing headphones. Three vibrating elements were placed directly underneath each foot (i.e., one each at the first metatarsal, fifth metatarsal and at the heel). For each standing trial, participants were instructed to stand quietly. For each surface translation trial, participants were instructed to recover their balance without stepping in response to a unexpected surface translation. Participants were unaware of which trials did or did not have vibration applied to the foot soles. Static and reactive balance control were quantified using various kinematic, kinetic and electromyography (EMG) measures, while the ability to recover balance was quantified through the measurement of EMG and body kinematics. Results indicated that vibratory noise input did not influence most measures of static and reactive balance control. This suggests that the application of vibratory noise input to the foot soles is not beneficial in younger adults. Future studies should replicate this study with clinical populations to determine whether the benefits of vibratory noise input are limited to individuals with worsened balance ability.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrock University Digital Repository (Brock University)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→