Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32511172›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience nursing : journal of the American Association of Neuroscience Nurses2020

Assessing Motor Function in Congenital Muscular Dystrophy Patients Using Accelerometry.

Tokunbor A Lawal, Joshua J Todd, Jeffrey S Elliott, Melody M Linton, Megan Andres, Jessica W Witherspoon, John P Collins, Irene C Chrismer, Fatoumata Tounkara, Melissa R Waite and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience nursing : journal of the American Association of Neuroscience Nurses, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. The congenital muscular dystrophies.Annals of the Child Neurology Society · 2024
    Review
  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

16 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tokunbor A Lawal
Joshua J Todd
Jeffrey S Elliott
Melody M Linton
Megan Andres
Jessica W Witherspoon
John P Collins
Irene C Chrismer
Fatoumata Tounkara
Melissa R Waite
Carmel Nichols
Carsten G Bönnemann
Carole Vuillerot
Roxanna Bendixen
Minal S Jain
Katherine G Meilleur
George Mason University · US

Funding

Molecular and Clinical Manifestations of Matrix and Aggregate MyopathiesZIANS003129 · NINDS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE · PI BÖNNEMANN, CARSTEN · 2011 to 2025
$52.8M
Functional characterization of genetic variants of uncertain significance in genes associated with excitation-contraction coupling disordersZIANR000040 · NINR · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCH · PI LAWAL, TOKUNBOR · 2023 to 2025
$895k
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 NR999999Intramural NIH HHS ZIA NR000040
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhen tested in a controlled clinic environment, individuals with neuromuscular-related symptoms may complete motor tasks within normal predicted ranges. However, measuring activity at home may better reflect typical motor performance. The accuracy of accelerometry measurements in individuals with congenital muscular dystrophy (CMD) is unknown. We aimed to compare accelerometry and manual step counts and assess free-living physical activity intensity in individuals with CMD using accelerometry.

methodsAmbulatory pediatric CMD participants (n = 9) performed the 6-minute walk test in clinic while wearing ActiGraph GT3X accelerometer devices. During the test, manual step counting was conducted to assess concurrent validity of the ActiGraph step count in this population using Bland-Altman analysis. In addition, activity intensity of 6 pediatric CMD participants was monitored at home with accelerometer devices for an average of 7 days. Cut-point values previously validated for neuromuscular disorders were used for data analysis.

resultsBland-Altman and intraclass correlation analyses showed no concurrent validity between manual and ActiGraph-recorded step counts. Fewer steps were recorded by ActiGraph step counts compared with manual step counts (411 ± 74 vs 699 ± 43, respectively; P = .004). Although improved, results were in the same direction with the application of low-frequency extension filters (587 ± 40 vs 699 ± 43, P = .03). ActiGraph step-count data did not correlate with manual step count (Spearman ρ = 0.32, P = .41; with low-frequency extension: Spearman ρ = 0.45, P = .22). Seven-day physical activity monitoring showed that participants spent more than 80% of their time in the sedentary activity level.

conclusionsIn a controlled clinic setting, step count was significantly lower by ActiGraph GT3X than by manual step counting, possibly because of the abnormal gait in this population. Additional studies using triaxial assessment are needed to validate accelerometry measurement of activity intensity in individuals with CMD. Accelerometry outcomes may provide valuable measures and complement the 6-minute walk test in the assessment of treatment efficacy in CMD.

Indexed as

Motor ActivityAccelerometryAdolescentChildFemaleHumansMaleMuscular DystrophiesReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID32511172
PMCPMC10449085
OpenAlexW3033773862

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.