Trial reportJournal of rehabilitation research and development2010
Analysis of user characteristics related to drop-off detection with long cane.
Trial report in Journal of rehabilitation research and development, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomechanics of Long Cane Use.Journal of visual impairment & blindness · 2019Article
- A new primary mobility tool for the visually impaired: A white cane-adaptive mobility device hybrid.Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA · 2018Article
- Drop-off detection with the long cane: effect of cane shaft weight and rigidity on performance.Ergonomics · 2017Article
- Effect of Cane Technique on Obstacle Detection with the Long Cane.Journal of visual impairment & blindness · 2014Article
- Effect of Cane Length on Drop-off Detection Performance.Journal of visual impairment & blindness · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study examined how user characteristics affect drop-off detection with the long cane. A mixed-measures design with block randomization was used for the study, in which 32 visually impaired adults attempted to detect the drop-offs using different cane techniques. Younger cane users detected drop-offs significantly more reliably (mean +/- standard deviation = 74.2% +/- 11.2% of the time) than older cane users (60.9% +/- 10.8%), p = 0.009. The drop-off detection threshold of the younger participants (5.2 +/- 2.1 cm) was also statistically significantly smaller than that of the older participants (7.9 +/- 2.2 cm), p = 0.007. Those with early-onset visual impairment (78.0% +/- 9.0%) also detected drop-offs significantly more reliably than those with later-onset visual impairment (67.3% +/- 12.4%), p = 0.01. No interaction occurred between examined user characteristics (age and age at onset of visual impairment) and the type of cane technique used in drop-off detection. The findings of the study may help orientation and mobility specialists select appropriate cane techniques in accordance with the cane user's age and onset of visual impairment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.