Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36179090›Full record

ArticlePhysical therapy2022

Daily-Living Freezing of Gait as Quantified Using Wearables in People With Parkinson Disease: Comparison With Self-Report and Provocation Tests.

Diana Denk, Talia Herman, Demi Zoetewei, Pieter Ginis, Marina Brozgol, Pablo Cornejo Thumm, Eva Decaluwe, Natalie Ganz, Luca Palmerini, Nir Giladi and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physical therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. What is new in Freezing of Gait?Journal of neurology · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Prevention of Falls in Parkinson's Disease: Guidelines and Gaps.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2023
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

12 authors.

Diana DenkCenter for the Study of Movement, Cognition and Mobility, Neurological Institute, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Talia HermanCenter for the Study of Movement, Cognition and Mobility, Neurological Institute, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Demi ZoeteweiKU Leuven, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Neurorehabilitation Research Group (eNRGy), Leuven, Belgium.
Pieter GinisKU Leuven, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Neurorehabilitation Research Group (eNRGy), Leuven, Belgium.
Marina BrozgolCenter for the Study of Movement, Cognition and Mobility, Neurological Institute, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Pablo Cornejo ThummCenter for the Study of Movement, Cognition and Mobility, Neurological Institute, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Eva DecaluweKU Leuven, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Neurorehabilitation Research Group (eNRGy), Leuven, Belgium.
Natalie GanzCenter for the Study of Movement, Cognition and Mobility, Neurological Institute, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Luca PalmeriniDepartment of Electrical, Electronic, and Information Engineering ''Guglielmo Marconi'', University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Nir GiladiCenter for the Study of Movement, Cognition and Mobility, Neurological Institute, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Alice NieuwboerKU Leuven, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Neurorehabilitation Research Group (eNRGy), Leuven, Belgium.
Jeffrey M HausdorffCenter for the Study of Movement, Cognition and Mobility, Neurological Institute, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveFreezing of gait (FOG) is an episodic, debilitating phenomenon that is common among people with Parkinson disease. Multiple approaches have been used to quantify FOG, but the relationships among them have not been well studied. In this cross-sectional study, we evaluated the associations among FOG measured during unsupervised daily-living monitoring, structured in-home FOG-provoking tests, and self-report.

methodsTwenty-eight people with Parkinson disease and FOG were assessed using self-report questionnaires, percentage of time spent frozen (%TF) during supervised FOG-provoking tasks in the home while off and on dopaminergic medication, and %TF evaluated using wearable sensors during 1 week of unsupervised daily-living monitoring. Correlations between those 3 assessment approaches were analyzed to quantify associations. Further, based on the %TF difference between in-home off-medication testing and in-home on-medication testing, the participants were divided into those responding to Parkinson disease medication (responders) and those not responding to Parkinson disease medication (nonresponders) in order to evaluate the differences in the other FOG measures.

resultsThe %TF during unsupervised daily living was mild to moderately correlated with the %TF during a subset of the tasks of the in-home off-medication testing but not the on-medication testing or self-report. Responders and nonresponders differed in the %TF during the personal "hot spot" task of the provoking protocol while off medication (but not while on medication) but not in the total scores of the self-report questionnaires or the measures of FOG evaluated during unsupervised daily living.

conclusionThe %TF during daily living was moderately related to FOG during certain in-home FOG-provoking tests in the off-medication state. However, this measure of FOG was not associated with self-report or FOG provoked in the on-medication state. These findings suggest that to fully capture FOG severity, it is best to assess FOG using a combination of all 3 approaches. IMPACT: These findings suggest that several complementary approaches are needed to provide a complete assessment of FOG severity.

Indexed as

Gait Disorders, NeurologicParkinson DiseaseWearable Electronic DevicesCross-Sectional StudiesGaitHumansSelf ReportDaily-Living MonitoringFOG AssessmentFOG SeverityFreezing of Gait

Identifiers

PMID36179090
PMCPMC10071496

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.