Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34344302›Full record

ArticleEuropean review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity2021

An interrater reliability study of gait analysis systems with the dual task paradigm in healthy young and older adults.

Thomas Jürgen Klotzbier, Bettina Wollesen, Oliver Vogel, Julian Rudisch, Thomas Cordes, Thomas Jöllenbeck, Lutz Vogt

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Correction: An interrater reliability study of gait analysis systems with the dual task paradigm in healthy young and older adults.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Thomas Jürgen KlotzbierDepartment of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Stuttgart, Allmandring 28, 70569, Stuttgart, Germany. thomas.klotzbier@inspo.uni-stuttgart.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7633-3835
Bettina WollesenDepartment of Human Movement Science, University of Hamburg, Mollerstraße 10, 20148, Hamburg, Germany.
Oliver VogelDepartment of Human Movement Science, University of Hamburg, Mollerstraße 10, 20148, Hamburg, Germany.
Julian RudischDepartment of Neuromotor Behavior and Exercise, Institute of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Münster, Horstmarer Landweg 62B, 48149, Münster, Germany.
Thomas CordesDepartment of Human Movement Science, University of Hamburg, Mollerstraße 10, 20148, Hamburg, Germany.
Thomas JöllenbeckInstitute for Biomechanics, Clinic Lindenplatz, Weslarner Str. 29, 59505, Bad Sassendorf, Germany.
Lutz VogtDepartment of Sports Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Ginnheimer Landstr. 39, 60487, Frankfurt, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsOne reason for the controversial discussion of whether the dual task (DT) walking paradigm has an added value for diagnosis in clinical conditions might be the use of different gait measurement systems. Therefore, the purpose was 1) to detect DT effects of central gait parameters obtained from five different gait analysis devices in young and old adults, 2) to assess the consistency of the measurement systems, and 3) to determine if the absolut and proportional DT costs (DTC) are greater than the system-measurement error under ST.

methodsTwelve old (72.2 ± 7.9y) and 14 young adults (28.3 ± 6.2y) walked a 14.7-m distance under ST and DT at a self-selected gait velocity. Interrater reliability, precision of the measurement and sensitivity to change were calculated under ST and DT.

resultsAn age effect was observed in almost all gait parameters for the ST condition. For DT only differences for stride length (p < .029, ɳ

conclusionsWhen reporting DT effects, the real changes in performance and random measurement errors should always be accounted for. These findings have strong implications for interpreting DT effects.

Indexed as

Cognitive-motor interferenceDual task walkingGait analysisMinimal detectable changeOlder adultsVerbal fluency

Identifiers

PMID34344302
PMCPMC8336354

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.