Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38446631›Full record

ArticleJournal of athletic training2025

Cognitive-Motor Dual-Task Performance of the Landing Error Scoring System.

Madison McWethy, Grant E Norte, David M Bazett-Jones, Amanda M Murray, Justin L Rush

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of athletic training, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Madison McWethyDepartment of Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Toledo, OH.
Grant E NorteCognition, Neuroplasticity, and Sarcopenia (CNS) Lab, Institute of Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Central Florida, Orlando.
David M Bazett-JonesDepartment of Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Toledo, OH.
Amanda M MurrayDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of Toledo, OH.
Justin L RushDivision of Physical Therapy, School of Rehabilitation and Communication Sciences, College of Health Sciences and Professions, Ohio University, Athens.
University of Toledo · USOhio University · USUniversity of Central Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextThe Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) is a common assessment used to determine biomechanical landing errors. However, this assessment is completed as a single motor task, which does not require additional attentional resources. It is unclear if the LESS can be used to detect cognitive-motor interference (ie, dual-task cost) in biomechanical errors associated with lower extremity injury.

objectiveTo determine if the LESS is a suitable clinical assessment of dual-task performance in uninjured women and to evaluate whether specific landing criteria are more affected by an additional cognitive load than others.

designCross-sectional study.

settingUniversity research laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER

participantsA total of 20 uninjured, physically active female participants (age = 22.4 ± 2.5 years, height = 1.68 ± 0.07 m, mass = 67.0 ± 13.8 kg, Tegner Activity Scale = 5.9 ± 1.1). INTERVENTION(S): Participants performed the LESS under 3 different conditions: baseline landing with no cognitive distraction (Single), a visual-based dual task (Visual), and a number-based dual task (Number). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES(S): Mean sagittal-plane, frontal-plane, and total LESS scores were compared between conditions using a 1-way repeated-measures analysis of variance with Tukey post hoc correction. A Cohen d effect size with a 95% confidence interval was used to determine the magnitude of differences. The frequency of errors for each LESS item under the 3 conditions was compared using χ2 analysis.

resultsParticipants exhibited greater sagittal-plane (P = .02, d = 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-1.56) and total (P = .008, d = 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-1.69) errors during the Visual condition than during the Single condition. The frequency of errors observed for each LESS item did not differ between conditions (all P > .05).

conclusionsThe LESS was able to detect a dual-task cost in landing errors during both the Visual conditions. We recommend developing clinically oriented solutions to incorporate similar dual-task paradigms in traditional injury risk-reduction programs.

Indexed as

CognitionLower ExtremityPsychomotor PerformanceTask Performance and AnalysisAdultAttentionBiomechanical PhenomenaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansYoung Adultclinical assessmentscognitive-motor performancelanding injury risk

Identifiers

PMID38446631
PMCPMC11789750
OpenAlexW4392504505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.