SynthesisJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2024
Meta-analysis of the quantitative assessment of lower extremity motor function in elderly individuals based on objective detection.
Synthesis in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo avoid deviation caused by the traditional scale method, the present study explored the accuracy, advantages, and disadvantages of different objective detection methods in evaluating lower extremity motor function in elderly individuals.
methodsStudies on lower extremity motor function assessment in elderly individuals published in the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and EMBASE databases in the past five years were searched. The methodological quality of the included trials was assessed using RevMan 5.4.1 and Stata, followed by statistical analyses.
resultsIn total, 19 randomized controlled trials with a total of 2626 participants, were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed that inertial measurement units (IMUs), motion sensors, 3D motion capture systems, and observational gait analysis had statistical significance in evaluating the changes in step velocity and step length of lower extremity movement in elderly individuals (P < 0.00001), which can be used as a standardized basis for the assessment of motor function in elderly individuals. Subgroup analysis showed that there was significant heterogeneity in the assessment of step velocity [SMD=-0.98, 95%CI(-1.23, -0.72), I
conclusionobservational gait analysis, motion sensors, 3D motion capture systems, and IMUs, as evaluation means, play a certain role in evaluating the characteristic parameters of step velocity and step length in lower extremity motor function of elderly individuals, which has good accuracy and clinical value in preventing motor injury. However, the high heterogeneity of observational gait analysis and IMUs suggested that different evaluation methods use different calculation formulas and indicators, resulting in the failure to obtain standardized indicators in clinical applications. Thus, multimodal quantitative evaluation should be integrated.
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.