The age related differences in individual joint contributions of the ankle, knee and hip in forward compensatory stepping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Problem: Falls in older adults are prevalent in Canada which cause physical, psychological, emotional and financial stressors. With an increasingly older adult population, fall prevention is key in solving this problem. Learning how to prevent falls starts by understanding the difference(s) between older adults and younger adults in balance recovery mechanisms. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate whether there were any age-related differences in stepping-lib joint moments and powers during the execution of a single-step compensatory balance response. Methods: A lean and release protocol was utilized to apply a balance disturbance to the participants. Participants were tasked to recover from the perturbation and restore stability using a single step with their preferred leg. The peak moment magnitude, peak moment power and timings of these peaks were recorded at the ankle, knee and hip in both the sagittal and frontal planes. Independent samples t-tests were used to compare joint-specific variables between older adults and younger adults to understand if age-related differences in stability may arise from challenges in moment generation or power absorption at specific joints. Results: Our results showed age-related differences in peak ankle moments in the sagittal plane as well as peak ankle power magnitudes in both the sagittal and frontal plane. In addition to these findings, our results also found key age-related differences in the timing of peak moments in the sagittal plane with both the hip and the knee joints as well as differences in the timing of peak power values in both the sagittal plane and frontal plane at the ankle, knee and hip joints. Conclusion: Age-related differences in the execution of the single-step compensatory response were found between older adults and younger adults. Our joint-specific findings can be used to further our understanding of balance control strategies in older adults but it also highlights the importance of timings in peak moment and power at the ankle, knee and hip which can be used to improve fall prevention and fall rehabilitation programs in older adults.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".