ArticleGait & posture2023
A new paradigm for assessing postural stability.
Article in Gait & posture, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of unilateral step training along with rhythmic auditory stimulation on balance and postural stability in stroke patients.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Effects of age, sex, and sensory information on balance performance in young and older adults.Frontiers in aging · 2026Article
- The Impact of Biodex Balance on Improving Coordination and Static Balance in Patients with Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Associations between white matter integrity and postural control in adults with traumatic brain injury.PloS one · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe sensory organization test (SOT) is an established and effective method for assessing postural stability and determining fall risk. SOT equilibrium scores are derived from the relationship between an individual's peak sway amplitude and a standard, theoretically-derived normal limits of stability (tLOS). Determining an individual's postural stability and fall risk based on this one-size-fits-all tLOS may overestimate functional equilibrium scores and underestimate fall risk when personal stability limits (pLOS) are reduced. RESEARCH QUESTION: The purpose of this study is to investigate whether LOS measured from a group of healthy adults is different from the tLOS, and whether SOT equilibrium scores are significantly different when calculated using pLOS versus the standard tLOS.
methodsSixty healthy volunteers were recruited into three age-groups: young (18-39), middle-aged (40-64), and elderly (65-80), with 10 males and 10 females in each age-group. Outcome measures included SOT and LOS. Additional measures o balance perception and functional mobility were obtained including the Activities Balance Confidence (ABC) scale and the timed-up-and-go test (TUG). The tLOS and pLOS were used to calculate standard (tSOT) and personalized (pSOT) equilibrium scores.
resultsThe mean pLOS from the group of healthy adults was significantly lower than the tLOS. Consequently, the pSOT equilibrium scores were significantly lower than the standard SOT scores derived using the tLOS. SIGNIFICANCE: Individual measures of LOS are significantly lower than theoretical estimates of the LOS in healthy adults. This suggests that use of tLOS in the calculation of SOT equilibrium scores often overestimates postural stability and may have implications for the determination of fall risk.
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.