MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117318365 · doi:10.1002/alz70858_106287

Gait Patterns as Digital Markers of Post‐Stroke Cognitive Impairment: A Comparative Analysis of Real‐World and Laboratory Assessments

2025· article· en· W7117318365 on OpenAlexaff
Shimaa Aboudeif, Britney Denroche, Bhavana Gill, Armin Ghayur Sadigh, Philip A. Barber, Sayeh Bayat

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteOntario Brain InstituteToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGaitWearable computerCognitionWearable technologySample (material)Gait analysisIdentification (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Transient ischemic attack (TIA), or ministroke, is a major risk factor for dementia, with post-TIA dementia risks reaching 20% at 5 years, 30% at 15 years, and 48% at 25 years. Given this high risk, health authorities emphasize the need for prediction and early detection. Subtle gait changes, emerging as early cognitive decline markers, are often assessed in laboratory settings. However, leveraging passively collected data from wearable technology enables continuous, real-world monitoring of mobility and cognitive health, offering an ecologically valid approach for early dementia detection. OBJECTIVE: To compare gait kinematic parameters between healthy individuals and TIA patients and assess the similarities in real-world and laboratory settings. METHOD: Gait data were collected from three TIA patients (67.67±2.52 years) and four healthy controls (67.75±4.19 years) using lumbar-worn wearable sensors. Real-world gait monitoring spanned 21 days; laboratory-based assessments included the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test and dual-task gait test. Key gait parameters were analyzed including step length, gait speed, stride length and cadence. Statistical comparisons were performed using independent t-tests (p < 0.05). RESULT: In real-world settings, TIA patients showed significantly larger vertical axis stride-step regularity difference (-2.71±0.07 vs. -2.57±0.03, p = 0.03), step length (0.91±0.02 m vs. 0.66±0.05 m, p = 0. 0.0009), stride length (1.82±0.04 m vs. 1.33±0.1 m, p = 0.001), gait speed (1.71±0.05 m/s vs. 1.19±0.08 m/s, p = 0.0004), and cadence (115.22±3.65 vs. 107.06±2.36, p = 0.029) compared to healthy controls. Between the real-world and laboratory settings in TIA patients, the absolute difference between stride and step regularity for the vertical axis with significantly larger in real life than in the lab (0.06±0.01 vs. 0.03±0.01, p = 0.014). While there was no significant difference between the two settings in healthy controls. CONCLUSION: Preliminary results suggest that TIA significantly affects some gait parameters, particularly in real-world settings. These findings demonstrate that real-world gait measurements may serve as sensitive and scalable markers of mobility decline, highlighting the potential of wearable technology for early detection and continuous monitoring of TIA. However, larger studies are needed to validate these findings due to the current small sample size.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.356 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→