ArticleZeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie2019
[Influence of dual-tasking on straight ahead and curved walking in older adults].
Article in Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gender- and domain-specific effects of a 6-month multidimensional exercise program on attention and verbal fluency in physically inactive older adults.Frontiers in aging · 2026Article
- Basic Spatiotemporal Gait Variables of Young and Older Healthy Volunteers Walking Along a Novel Figure-of-8 Path.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Walking Along Curved Trajectories. Changes With Age and Parkinson's Disease. Hints to Rehabilitation.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWalking is not an automatic movement task but requires continuous attention resources. While walking and undertaking an additional task (dual tasking), gait changes occur which are associated with falls in older adults. To date, the evaluation of gait characteristics under dual task conditions is typically performed during walking straight ahead (SW); however, everyday life also requires more complex walking maneuvers such as walking in a curve (CW). Complex walking maneuvers may require higher attentional resources and thus might have a greater impact on the gait under dual task conditions.
objectiveThe aim was to compare the gait characteristics under dual task conditions during SW and CW. MATERIAL AND
methodsIn 30 community-dwelling older adults (mean age: 71.6 ± 6.6 years) gait parameters including single leg support phase, velocity, cadence, step length and width were measured by electronic gait analysis (GAITRite®, CIR Systems Inc., Franklin, New Jersey, USA) during SW and CW under single and dual task conditions. For each gait parameter the relative change from single to dual task condition was calculated as dual task costs (DTC) and compared using paired t‑tests.
resultsFor the single leg support phase, velocity, cadence and step width, descriptive results showed increased DTC during CW (2.08-23.74%) as compared to SW (1.39-12.90%). For cadence (DTC: SW 6.81 ± 12.58%, CW 10.54 ± 13.46%, p = 0.026) and step width (DTC: SW -12.90 ± 18.01%, CW -23.74 ± 56.37%, p = 0.004) the differences were statistically significant.
conclusionThe relative decline in gait performance under dual task conditions is greater during CW than during SW. The results suggest that CW requires greater attentional resources as compared to SW. In turn, the risk of falling might be increased during CW under dual task conditions. The present findings may contribute to the development of new, ecologically valid assessment and training strategies taking complex walking maneuvers into account.
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.