ArticleProsthetics and orthotics international2020
Performance-based outcome measures are associated with cadence variability during community ambulation among individuals with a transtibial amputation.
Article in Prosthetics and orthotics international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effect of a Fully Immersive Virtual Reality Training Program on Walking Parameters in People With Unilateral Below-Knee Amputation: An Experimental and a Single-Subject Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- References values and standardized testing protocols for performance-based and patient-reported outcome measures among individuals with lower limb amputation.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Article
- Mechanical Method for Rapid Determination of Step Count Sensor Settings.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- A Scientometric Analysis and Visualization of Prosthetic Foot Research Work: 2000 to 2022.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Impact of Kinesiotherapy and Hydrokinetic Therapy on the Rehabilitation of Balance, Gait and Functional Capacity in Patients with Lower Limb Amputation: A Pilot Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Reported Outcome Measures in Studies of Real-World Ambulation in People with a Lower Limb Amputation: A Scoping Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn the United States, Medicare Functional Classification Level (K-level) guidelines require demonstration of cadence variability to justify higher-level prosthetic componentry prescription; however, clinical assessment of cadence variability is subjective. Currently, no clinical outcome measures are associated with cadence variability during community ambulation.
objectivesEvaluate whether physical performance, i.e. 10-meter Walk Test (10mWT)-based walking speeds, L-Test, and Figure-of-8 Walk Test scores, is associated with community-based cadence variability among individuals with a transtibial amputation. STUDY
designCross-sectional.
methodsForty-nine participants, aged 18-85 years, with a unilateral transtibial amputation were included. Linear regression models were conducted to determine whether physical performance was associated with cadence variability (a unitless calculation from FitBit® One
resultsBeyond covariates, self-selected gait speed explained the greatest amount of variance in cadence variability (19.2%,
conclusionsIn clinical settings, faster self-selected gait speed best predicted increased cadence variability during community ambulation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The 10-meter Walk Test may be prioritized during prosthetic evaluations to provide objective self-selected walking speed data, which informs the assessment of cadence variability potential outside of clinical settings.
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.