ArticleGait & posture2024
Gait kinematics differ by bout duration and setting.
Article in Gait & posture, 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.
- Monitoring Gait Recovery After Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Wearable Sensors: Responsiveness of Gait Accelerations.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGait kinematics differ between settings and among young and older adults with and without knee osteoarthritis. Out-of-lab data has a variety of walking bout characteristics compared to controlled in-lab settings. The effect of walking bout duration on gait analysis results is unclear, and there is no standardized procedure for segmenting or selecting out-of-lab data for analysis. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do gait kinematics differ by bout duration or setting in young and older adults with and without knee osteoarthritis?
methodsTen young (28.1±3.5 yrs), ten older adults (60.8±3.3 yrs), and ten older adults with knee osteoarthritis (64.1±3.6 yrs) performed a standard in-lab gait analysis followed by a prescribed walking route outside the lab at a comfortable speed with four IMUs. Walking speed, stride length, and sagittal hip, knee, and ankle angular excursion (ROM) were calculated for each identified stride. Out-of-lab strides included straight-line, level walking divided into strides that occurred during long (>60 s) or short (≤60 s) bouts. Gait kinematics were compared between in-lab and both out-of-lab bout durations among groups.
resultsSignificant main effects of setting or duration were found for walking speed and stride length, but there were no significant differences in hip, knee, or ankle joint ROM. Walking speed and stride length were greater in-lab followed by long and short bout out-of-lab. No significant interaction was observed between group and setting or bout duration for any spatiotemporal variables or joint ROMs. SIGNIFICANCE: Out-of-lab gait data can be beneficial in identifying gait characteristics that individuals may not encounter in the traditional lab setting. Setting has an impact on walking kinematics, so comparisons of in-lab and free-living gait may be impacted by the duration of walking bouts. A standardized approach for to analyzing out-of-lab gait data is important for comparing studies and populations.
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.