ArticleExperimental brain research2024
Distinct locomotor adaptation between conventional walking and walking with a walker.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Locomotor adaptation on a split-belt treadmill: mechanisms, modulation, and clinical utility.Journal of neurophysiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rolling walkers are common walking aids for individuals with poor physical fitness or balance impairments. There is no doubt that rolling walkers are useful in assisting locomotion. On the other hand, it is arguable that walking with rolling walkers (WW) is effective for maintaining or restoring the nervous systems that are recruited during conventional walking (CW). This is because the differences and similarities of the neural control of these locomotion forms remain unknown. The purpose of the present study was to compare the neural control of WW and CW from the perspective of a split-belt adaptation paradigm and reveal how the adaptations that take place in WW and CW would affect each other. The anterior component of the ground reaction (braking) forces was measured during and after walking on a split-belt treadmill by 10 healthy subjects, and differences in the peak braking forces between the left and right sides were calculated as the index of the split-belt adaptation (the degree of asymmetry). The results demonstrated that (1) WW enabled subjects to respond to the split-belt condition immediately after its start as compared to CW; (2) the asymmetry movement pattern acquired by the split-belt adaptation in one gait mode (i.e., CW or WW) was less transferable to the other gait mode; (3) the asymmetry movement pattern acquired by the split-belt adaptation in CW was not completely washed out by subsequent execution in WW and vice versa. The results suggest unique control of WW and the specificity of neural control between WW and CW; use of the walkers is not necessarily appropriate as training for CW from the perspective of neural control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38856929What 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.