Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33344014›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of sports physical therapy2020

BALANCE TRAINING: DOES ANTICIPATED BALANCE CONFIDENCE CORRELATE WITH ACTUAL BALANCE CONFIDENCE FOR DIFFERENT UNSTABLE OBJECTS?

Scott W Cheatham, Gioella Chaparro, Morey J Kolber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of sports physical therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

3 authors.

Scott W CheathamCalifornia State University Dominguez Hills, Carson, CA, USA.
Gioella ChaparroCalifornia State University Dominguez Hills, Carson, CA, USA.
Morey J KolberNova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSports rehabilitation professionals often prescribe unstable objects for balance training. Unfortunately, there is a lack of measurement of balance confidence when incorporating these objects. Currently, there is no consensus on the optimal balance confidence measure or proposed progression of unstable objects. Understanding the influence of balance confidence on task performance using unstable objects may help professionals better prescribe a balance training program. PURPOSE: The primary purpose of this investigation was to explore the correlation between anticipated and actual balance confidence on different unstable objects during static double leg and single leg stance. The secondary purpose was to explore the correlation between anticipated and actual unstable object difficulty rankings. STUDY

designRepeated measure observational, controlled trial.

methodsSixty-five active, healthy adults (M = 35, F = 30) (mean age = 24.38 ± 3.56) underwent two testing sessions. During session one, participants took an online survey, rating their anticipated balance confidence after observing images of different unstable objects. During session two, participants stood on each unstable object under two conditions (static double leg stance and single leg stance) and rated their actual balance confidence. The main outcome measure was an ordinal balance confidence score adapted from the activities-specific balance confidence scale. Statistical analysis included subject demographic calculations and appropriate non-parametric tests.

resultsFor the double leg stance and single leg stance conditions, there was a very strong correlation between anticipated and actual balance confidence scores on the stable surface (ρ = 1.0, p = <.001). There was a weak correlation between scores for foam pad, air-filled discs, Bosu® (dome up), Bosu® (dome down), and wobble board for both conditions. For unstable object rankings, there was a very strong correlation between scores (ρ=1.0, p = <.001). The objects were ranked by perceived difficulty as follows: Level 1 (easy)- ground, Level 2- foam pad, Level 3- air-filled discs, Level 4- Bosu®, and Level 5 (difficult)- wobble board.

conclusionStudy findings suggest that actual measures of balance confidence may provide insight into a patient's confidence level and may help with prescribing and progressing their program. The suggested unstable object difficulty rankings may help professionals better match the objects to their patients to produce optimal outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2c.

Indexed as

Balancefallmotor controlproprioceptionrisk

Identifiers

PMID33344014
PMCPMC7727423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.