MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7119634427 · doi:10.1002/alz70856_107578

The relationship between gait task performance and AD plasma biomarkers in cognitively unimpaired older adults and patients with mild cognitive impairment

2025· article· en· W7119634427 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Savannah Doster, Ashley N. Price, Jordan Sergio, Maeve Durkin, Jennifer Strenger, Louisa I. Thompson, Megan Stradtman, Stuart Sinoff, Jessica Alber

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGaitCognitive impairmentCognitionTask (project management)Gait analysisActivities of daily living

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Gait impairments in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementias pose a major fall risk/contribute to morbidity/mortality. The Timed Up and Go (TUG) test is often used to assess mobility, gait changes, and dual-task performance. The TUG-Dual Task (TUG-DT) version adds serial subtraction exercises to evaluate dual-task cost (DTC). For cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals or those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), plasma biomarkers like pTau217, pTau181, and neurofilament light chain (NfL) can help assess the risk of AD. This study aimed to explore the relationship between TUG performance and plasma biomarkers in CU and MCI patients. METHODS: Participants included CU low-risk (n = 75), CU high-risk (n = 87), and CI (n = 32) older adults aged 55-80, mean = .67.28 ± 6.062 years. Cognitive ability was assessed using the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CU = 0; CI = 0.5 or 1.0) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (CU ≥ 26; 18 ≤ CI ≤ 26). AD-risk was determined by APOE genotyping and family history for CU groups. Plasma biomarkers pTau217, pTau181, and NfL were analyzed from fasting blood draws. Participants completed the TUG and TUG-DT. ANOVAs, ANCOVAs, logistic regression, and generalized additive models (GAMs), were used to analyze the relationship between demographic factors, gait performance, and plasma biomarkers, with model comparisons guiding the final choice of GAMs for their flexibility in handling non-linear relationships. RESULTS: Step count analysis on the TUG showed that the CU-high-risk and MCI groups performed similarly, while the CU-low-risk group completed significantly fewer steps than both. Plasma biomarkers, particularly pTau181 and NfL, interacted to predict gait performance only in the CU high-risk group. CONCLUSIONS: The TUG can predict plasma pTau217 levels with high specificity, distinguishing CU individuals not at risk for AD. Additionally, pTau181 and NfL interacted to predict performance on the TUG and TUG-DT in the CU-high-risk group, suggesting subtle gait changes may signal early AD pathology. The CU-low-risk group's reduced step count compared to others indicates preclinical AD might manifest with subtle mobility impairments. These findings support using simple gait tasks like the TUG for AD risk assessment 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 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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.281 · 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→