ArticleBMJ open sport & exercise medicine2021
Impact of walking aids on estimating physical activity using a tri-axial accelerometer in frail older adults.
Article in BMJ open sport & exercise medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Protocol to Self-Familiarize Health Care Professionals with the Detection Limits of a Physical Activity Tracker for Low-Impact Steps in Patients Recovering from Knee Surgery-A Proposal and a First Evaluation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Gender-Specific Patterns of Injury in Older Adults After a Fall from a Four-Wheeled Walker (Rollator): Retrospective Study from a Swiss Level 1 Trauma Centre.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Prediction of the Physical Activity Level of Community-Dwelling Older Japanese Adults with a Triaxial Accelerometer Containing a Classification Algorithm for Ambulatory and Non-Ambulatory Activities.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to compare the estimation error of physical activity level (PAL) estimated using a tri-axial accelerometer between an independent walking group and an assisted walking group with walking aids.
methodsSubjects were 6 older adults who could walk independently and 10 older adults requiring walking assistance during gait. Total energy expenditure (TEE) was measured using the doubly labelled water (DLW) method over 2 weeks and PAL was calculated as the measured TEE divided by the basal metabolic rate measured using indirect calorimetry (PAL
resultsThe median PAL estimation error in the assisted walking group was -0.30 kcal/day (range: -0.77 to -0.01 kcal/day) and more underestimated than that in the independent walking group (p=0.02). The estimation error of PAL
conclusionsUsing the accelerometer, PAL was underestimated for older adults who used walking aids but not for those who walked independently under free-living conditions.
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.