Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32302930›Full record

ArticleGait & posture2020

Attentional prioritization in dual-task walking: Effects of stroke, environment, and instructed focus.

Prudence Plummer, Lori Altmann, Jody Feld, Lisa Zukowski, Bijan Najafi, Carol Giuliani

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gait & posture, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

6 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Prudence PlummerDepartment of Physical Therapy, MGH Institute of Health Professions, 36 1st Avenue, Boston, MA, 02129, United States. Electronic address: pplummer@mghihp.edu.
Lori AltmannDepartment of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.
Jody FeldDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University, NC, United States.
Lisa ZukowskiDepartment of Physical Therapy, High Point University, High Point, NC, United States.
Bijan NajafiMichael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States.
Carol GiulianiDepartment of Allied Health Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, United States.
Baylor College of Medicine · USDuke University Hospital · USHigh Point University · USMGH Institute of Health Professions · USUniversity of Florida · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Real World Assessment of Dual-Task Performance After StrokeR21HD076157 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI PLUMMER, PRUDENCE · 2014 to 2015
$430k
NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD076157
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe impact of high distraction, real-world environments on dual-task interference and flexibility of attentional prioritization during dual-task walking in people with stroke is unknown. RESEARCH QUESTION: How does a real-world environment affect dual-task performance and flexible task prioritization during dual-task walking in adults with and without stroke?

methodsAdults with stroke (n = 29) as well as age-, gender-, and education-matched adults without stroke (n = 23) participated. Single and dual-task walking were examined in two different environments (lab hallway, hospital lobby). Two different dual-task combinations were assessed (Stroop-gait, speech-gait). Each dual-task was performed first without explicit instruction about task prioritization (no-priority) and then with gait-priority instruction and Stroop/speech-priority instruction in randomized order.

resultsPeople with stroke had significantly slower dual-task gait speed (Stroop only) in the lobby than the lab, but the effect was not clinically meaningful. Stroop reaction time for all participants was also slower in the lobby than the lab. All participants slowed their walking speed while generating spontaneous speech, but this effect was not influenced by environment. The dual-task attention allocation strategy was generally inflexible to instructed prioritization in adults with and without stroke in both environments, however, the volitional attention allocation strategy differed for the two dual-task conditions such that speech was prioritized in the speech-gait dual-task and gait appeared to be prioritized in the Stroop-gait dual-task. SIGNIFICANCE: Although dual-tasking slows walking speed and verbal responses to auditory stimuli in people with stroke, the effects are not considerably impacted by a more complex, distracting environment. Adults with and without stroke may have difficulty overriding the preferred attention allocation strategy during dual-task walking, especially for habitual dual-tasks such as walking while speaking. It may also be that the cognitive control strategy governing task prioritization is influenced by degree of cognitive engagement.

Indexed as

AttentionSpeechTask Performance and AnalysisAdultAgedCognitionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReaction TimeStrokeWalkingWalking SpeedAttentionCognitionGaitRehabilitationStroke

Identifiers

PMID32302930
PMCPMC7299740
OpenAlexW3015496411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.