ArticleBrain sciences2021
Relationship between Speed of Response Inhibition and Ability to Suppress a Step in Midlife and Older Adults.
Article in Brain sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- The stop signal stepping task: how action cancellation commands disrupt step initiation in young and healthy older adults.GeroScience · 2026Article
- The Effect of Rhythmic Audio-Visual Stimulation on Inhibitory Control: An ERP Study.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Inhibitory Control and Fall Prevention: Why Stopping Matters.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Coupling of sensorimotor and cognitive functions in middle- and late adulthood.Frontiers in neuroscience · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In young adults, performance on a test of response inhibition was recently found to be correlated with performance on a reactive balance test where automated stepping responses must occasionally be inhibited. The present study aimed to determine whether this relationship holds true in older adults, wherein response inhibition is typically deficient and the control of postural equilibrium presents a greater challenge. Ten participants (50+ years of age) completed a seated cognitive test (stop signal task) followed by a reactive balance test. Reactive balance was assessed using a modified lean-and-release system where participants were required to step to regain balance following perturbation, or suppress a step if an obstacle was present. The stop signal task is a standardized cognitive test that provides a measure of the speed of response inhibition called the Stop Signal Reaction Time (SSRT). Muscle responses in the legs were compared between conditions where a step was allowed or blocked to quantify response inhibition of the step. The SSRT was significantly related to leg muscle suppression during balance recovery in the stance leg. Thus, participants that were better at inhibiting their responses in the stop signal task were also better at inhibiting an unwanted leg response in favor of grasping a supportive handle. The relationship between a seated cognitive test using finger responses and leg muscle suppression when a step was blocked indicates a context-independent, generalized capacity for response inhibition. This suggests that a simple cognitive test such as the stop signal task could be used clinically to predict an individual's capacity for adapting balance reactions and fall risk. The present results provide support for future studies, with larger samples, to verify this relationship between stop signal reaction time and leg response during balance recovery.
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.