Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24788068›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Are the 10 meter and 6 minute walk tests redundant in patients with spinal cord injury?

Gail F Forrest, Karen Hutchinson, Douglas J Lorenz, Jeffrey J Buehner, Leslie R Vanhiel, Sue Ann Sisto, D Michele Basso

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02943915 (The WISE Trial - Walking Improvement for SCI With Exoskeleton), which is not on this map. Cited by 38 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT02943915 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

The WISE Trial - Walking Improvement for SCI With Exoskeleton

TypeinterventionalSponsorEkso BionicsRan2016 to 2019Enrolled45ConditionsInjuries, Spinal CordArmsEkso GT Rehabilitation Therapy, Body Weight Supported (BWS) Treadmill Training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Walking Ability Outcome Measures in Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Gail F ForrestHuman Performance and Engineering Laboratory, Kessler Foundation Research Center, West Orange, New Jersey, United States of America; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rutgers, New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey, United States of America.
Karen HutchinsonDepartment of Physical Therapy and Athletic Training, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Douglas J LorenzDepartment of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, School of Public Health and Information Sciences, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America; Kentucky Spinal Cord Research Center, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America.
Jeffrey J BuehnerWexner Medical Center at the Ohio State University- Dodd Hall, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Leslie R VanhielHulse Spinal Cord Injury Lab and Crawford Research Institute, Shepherd Center, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Sue Ann SistoState University of New York at Stony Brook, School of Health Technology and Management, Research and Development Park, Rehabilitation Research and Movement Performance Laboratory, Stony Brook, New York, United States of America.
D Michele BassoThe Ohio State University, School of Allied Medical Professions, Center for Brain and Spinal Cord Repair, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the relationship and redundancy between gait speeds measured by the 10 Meter Walk Test (10MWT) and 6 Minute Walk Test (6MWT) after motor incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI). To identify gait speed thresholds supporting functional ambulation as measured with the Spinal Cord Injury Functional Ambulation Inventory (SCI-FAI).

designProspective observational cohort.

settingSeven outpatient rehabilitation centers from the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation NeuroRecovery Network (NRN).

participants249 NRN patients with American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) level C (n = 20), D (n = 179) and (n = 50) iSCI not AIS evaluated, from February 2008 through April 2011.

interventionsLocomotor training using body weight support and walking on a treadmill, overground and home/community practice. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): 10MWT and 6MWT collected at enrollment, approximately every 20 sessions, and upon discharge.

resultsThe 10MWT and 6MWT speeds were highly correlated and the 10MWT speeds were generally faster. However, the predicted 6MWT gait speed from the 10MWT, revealed increasing error with increased gait speed. Regression lines remained significantly different from lines of agreement, when the group was divided into fast (≥0.44 m/s) and slow walkers (<0.44 m/s). Significant differences between 6MWT and 10MWT gait speeds were observed across SCI-FAI walking mobility categories (Wilcoxon sign rank test p<.001), and mean speed thresholds for limited community ambulation differed for each measure. The smallest real difference for the 6MWT and 10MWT, as well as the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) values, were also distinct for the two tests.

conclusionsWhile the speeds were correlated between the 6MWT and 10MWT, redundancy in the tests using predictive modeling was not observed. Different speed thresholds and separate MCIDs were defined for community ambulation for each test.

Indexed as

Exercise TherapyWalkingAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSpinal Cord InjuriesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID24788068
PMCPMC4006773

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.