Differential relationships of gait velocity mean and variability with cognitive performance in preclinical older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Gait decline may serve as a critical and early indicator for cognitive impairment, yet these associations have primarily been examined qualitatively, with a focus only on means, and primarily restricted to cohorts of impaired individuals. We have previously identified differential relationships of quantitatively measured gait velocity mean and intra‐individual variability (IIV) with AD‐related plasma biomarkers in preclinical older adults. Here we aimed to explore their relationships to objective cognitive performance and examine if quantitatively measured mean and IIV of gait velocity exhibit distinct relationships. Method This cross‐sectional study included 258 cognitively normal older adults (74.8% White, 22.1% Black/ African American, and 2.3% Asian) from the NYU Alzheimer's Disease Research Center cohort who underwent quantitative gait analysis via the GAITRite electronic walkway. Mean and IIV of gait velocity were assessed over eight laps. Cognition was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE), and other tests included in the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center's Uniform Data Set 3.0. Depressive symptoms were assessed via the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS). The analysis utilized multiple linear regression models, adjusted for age, sex, education, and GDS. Result Gait velocity IIV was negatively correlated with MMSE ( p = 0.02). Mean gait velocity positively correlated with the MoCA ( p = 0.01), number span backward ( p = 0.03), category fluency (animals and vegetables) ( p = 0.02), verbal fluency ( p = 0.05). Additional trends suggested that lower cognitive scores were associated with increased IIV and lower mean gait velocity value. Conclusion Our results demonstrate that IIV and means of gait velocity show differential relationships with cognitive tests in preclinical individuals. This suggests that gait velocity IIV may have a unique predictive role in the preclinical state distinct from gait velocity mean. Further longitudinal studies are warranted to address the correlations of mean versus IIV of gait velocity with future objective cognitive decline.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".