Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34143241›Full record

Trial reportExperimental brain research2021

Cognitive and motor task performance under single- and dual-task conditions: effects of consecutive versus concurrent practice.

Rainer Beurskens, Dennis Brueckner, Hagen Voigt, Thomas Muehlbauer

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Experimental brain research, 2021. 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
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  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

4 authors.

Rainer BeurskensDepartment of Health and Social Affairs, FHM Bielefeld - University of Applied Sciences, Bielefeld, Germany. beurskens@fh-mittelstand.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4512-4491
Dennis BruecknerDivision of Movement and Training Sciences/Biomechanics of Sport, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Hagen VoigtDivision of Movement and Training Sciences/Biomechanics of Sport, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Thomas MuehlbauerDivision of Movement and Training Sciences/Biomechanics of Sport, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The concurrent execution of two or more tasks simultaneously results in performance decrements in one or both conducted tasks. The practice of dual-task (DT) situations has been shown to decrease performance decrements. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of consecutive versus concurrent practice on cognitive and motor task performance under single-task (ST) and DT conditions. Forty-five young adults (21 females, 24 males) were randomly assigned to either a consecutive practice (INT consecutive) group, a concurrent practice (INT concurrent) group or a control (CON) group (i.e., no practice). Both INT groups performed 2 days of acquisition, i.e., practicing a cognitive and a motor task either consecutively or concurrently. The cognitive task required participants to perform an auditory stroop task and the number of correct responses was used as outcome measure. In the motor task, participants were asked to stand on a stabilometer and to keep the platform as close to horizontal as possible. The time in balance was calculated for further analysis. Pre- and post-practice testing included performance assessment under ST (i.e., cognitive task only, motor task only) and DT (i.e., cognitive and motor task simultaneously) test conditions. Pre-practice testing revealed no significant group differences under ST and DT test conditions neither for the cognitive nor the motor task measure. During acquisition, both INT groups improved their cognitive and motor task performance. The post-practice testing showed significantly better cognitive and motor task values under ST and DT test conditions for the two INT groups compared to the CON group. Further comparisons between the two INT groups revealed better motor but not cognitive task values in favor of the INT consecutive practice group (ST: p = 0.022; DT: p = 0.002). We conclude that consecutive and concurrent practice resulted in better cognitive (ST condition) and motor (ST and DT test conditions) task performance than no practice. In addition, consecutive practice resulted in superior motor task performance (ST and DT test conditions) compared to concurrent practice and is, therefore, recommended when executing DT practice schedules.

Indexed as

Postural BalanceTask Performance and AnalysisCognitionFemaleHumansMaleStroop TestYoung AdultAuditory stroop taskHumanPostural controlSkill acquisitionStabilometer

Identifiers

PMID34143241
PMCPMC8354888

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.