Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31138310›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2019

Development and validation of Comprehensive Gait Assessment using InerTial Sensor score (C-GAITS score) derived from acceleration and angular velocity data at heel and lower trunk among community-dwelling older adults.

Shogo Misu, Tsuyoshi Asai, Takehiko Doi, Ryuichi Sawa, Yuya Ueda, Shunsuke Murata, Takashi Saito, Taiki Sugimoto, Tsunenori Isa, Yamato Tsuboi and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Shogo MisuDepartment of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Nursing and Rehabilitation, Konan Women's University, 6-2-13, Morikita-machi, Higashinada-ku, Kobe, 658-0001, Japan. s-misu@konan-wu.ac.jp.ORCID 0000-0003-0015-7078
Tsuyoshi AsaiDepartment of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation, Kobegakuin University, 516 Arise, Ikawadani-cho, Nishi-ku, Kobe, 651-2180, Japan.
Takehiko DoiDepartment of Preventive Gerontology, Center for Gerontology and Social Science, National Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, 35 Gengo Morioka, Obu, 474-8511, Japan.
Ryuichi SawaDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Kobe University Graduate School of Health Sciences, 7-10-2 Tomogaoka, Suma-ku, Kobe, 654-0142, Japan.
Yuya UedaDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Kobe University Graduate School of Health Sciences, 7-10-2 Tomogaoka, Suma-ku, Kobe, 654-0142, Japan.
Shunsuke MurataDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Kobe University Graduate School of Health Sciences, 7-10-2 Tomogaoka, Suma-ku, Kobe, 654-0142, Japan.
Takashi SaitoDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Kobe University Graduate School of Health Sciences, 7-10-2 Tomogaoka, Suma-ku, Kobe, 654-0142, Japan.
Taiki SugimotoDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Kobe University Graduate School of Health Sciences, 7-10-2 Tomogaoka, Suma-ku, Kobe, 654-0142, Japan.
Tsunenori IsaDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Kobe University Graduate School of Health Sciences, 7-10-2 Tomogaoka, Suma-ku, Kobe, 654-0142, Japan.
Yamato TsuboiDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Kobe University Graduate School of Health Sciences, 7-10-2 Tomogaoka, Suma-ku, Kobe, 654-0142, Japan.
Minoru YamadaGraduate School of Comprehensive Human Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Tokyo, Japan, 3-29-1 Otsuka, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 112-0012, Japan.
Rei OnoDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Kobe University Graduate School of Health Sciences, 7-10-2 Tomogaoka, Suma-ku, Kobe, 654-0142, Japan.
Hyogo University of Health Sciences · JPKobe Gakuin University · JPKonan Women's University · JPNational Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology · JPOtsuka (Japan) · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough some gait parameters from inertial sensors have been shown to be associated with important clinical issues, because of controversial results, it remains uncertain which parameters for which axes are clinically valuable. Following the idea that a comprehensive score obtained by summing various gait parameters would sensitively reflect declines in gait performance, we developed a scoring method for community-dwelling older adults, the Comprehensive Gait Assessment using InerTial Sensor score (C-GAITS score). The aim of this study was to examine the internal consistency and the construct validity of this method.

methodsIn this cross-sectional study, the gait performance of 378 community-dwelling older people (mean age = 71.7 ± 4.2 years, 210 women) was assessed using inertial sensors attached to the heel and lower trunk. Participants walked along a 15-m walkway, and accelerations, angular velocity, and walking time were measured. From these data, walking speed, mean stride time, coefficients of variation of stride time and swing time, and autocorrelation coefficients and harmonic ratios of acceleration in vertical, mediolateral, and anteroposterior directions at the lower trunk were calculated. Scoring was performed based on quartile by gender (i.e., scored from 0 to 3) for each of the 10 gait parameters. The C-GAITS score was the sum of these scores (range: 0-30). Lower extremity strength, balance function, fall history, and fear of falling were also assessed.

resultsAn exploratory factor analysis revealed that the C-GAITS score yielded four distinct factors explaining 57.1% of the variance. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.77. A single linear regression analysis showed a significant relationship between total C-GAITS score and walking speed (adjusted R

conclusionsGood internal consistency and appropriate construct validity of the C-GAITS score were confirmed among community-dwelling older adults. The score might be useful in clinical settings because of ease of use and interpretation and capability of capturing functional decline.

Indexed as

AccelerometryAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGaitHeelHumansIndependent LivingMaleTorsoWalking SpeedAccelerationAngular velocityCommunity-dwelling older peopleGaitInertial sensorScoreValidity

Identifiers

PMID31138310
PMCPMC6540531
OpenAlexW2947701815

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.