Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35957484›Full record

SynthesisSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Perturbations during Gait: A Systematic Review of Methodologies and Outcomes.

Zoe Taylor, Gregory S Walsh, Hannah Hawkins, Mario Inacio, Patrick Esser

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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. The Effect of Human Settlement Pedestrian Environment on Gait of Older People: An Umbrella Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Zoe TaylorCentre for Movement, Occupation and Rehabilitation Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK.
Gregory S WalshCentre for Movement, Occupation and Rehabilitation Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7380-8105
Hannah HawkinsCentre for Movement, Occupation and Rehabilitation Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK.
Mario InacioCentre for Movement, Occupation and Rehabilitation Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK.
Patrick EsserCentre for Movement, Occupation and Rehabilitation Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3227-0115

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite extensive literature regarding laboratory-based balance perturbations, there is no up-to-date systematic review of methods. This systematic review aimed to assess current perturbation methods and outcome variables used to report participant biomechanical responses during walking.

methodsWeb of Science, CINAHL, and PubMed online databases were searched, for records from 2015, the last search was on 30th of May 2022. Studies were included where participants were 18+ years, with or without clinical conditions, conducted in non-hospital settings. Reviews were excluded. Participant descriptive, perturbation method, outcome variables and results were extracted and summarised. Bias was assessed using the Appraisal tool for Cross-sectional Studies risk of bias assessment tool. Qualitative analysis was performed as the review aimed to investigate methods used to apply perturbations.

results644 records were identified and 33 studies were included, totaling 779 participants. The most frequent method of balance perturbation during gait was by means of a treadmill translation. The most frequent outcome variable collected was participant step width, closely followed by step length. Most studies reported at least one spatiotemporal outcome variable. All included studies showed some risk of bias, generally related to reporting of sampling approaches. Large variations in perturbation type, duration and intensity and outcome variables were reported.

conclusionsThis review shows the wide variety of published laboratory perturbation methods. Moreover, it demonstrates the significant impact on outcome measures of a study based on the type of perturbation used. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID: CRD42020211876.

Indexed as

GaitPostural BalanceCross-Sectional StudiesExercise TestHumansWalkingbalancefallsgaitperturbation

Identifiers

PMID35957484
PMCPMC9371403

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.