ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2025
The Effect of Cognitive-Motor Dual Tasks on the Risk of Falls in Female Saudi Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2025. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Dual tasking (DT) requires individuals to carry out two actions simultaneously, comparable to how the brain can perform a cognitive function while the body is in motion, which eventually enhances human balance. This paper aims to examine and compare the impact of DT on the risk of falling (ROF) among Saudi female students. Methods: A cross-sectional design was used. 120 female students were recruited and divided into two groups: literary group (LG) (n = 34) and scientific group (SG) (n = 86). Participants, aged 18-25, had a normal body mass index (BMI) and cognitive and balancing skills. ROF was measured using the Biodex balancing device for balance alone (no DT) and with DT (motor and two cognitive tasks). After three trials, the mean and average were calculated. The ICC calculation showed a reliable result of <0.8. BMI was represented as the mean (M) and standard deviation (SD) for both groups. ROF was compared within and between groups using paired and unpaired T-tests. Mann-Whitney compared the two groups throughout DT. The level of significance was P = 0.05. Results: There was no significant difference in ROF in SG (P = 0.06) between the performance with and without a DT; on the contrary, LG demonstrated a significant difference (P = 0.001) for the same tests. In addition, the only time there was a significant difference between the two groups was when they performed DT (P = 0.006). Conclusion: Female students who used critical and analytical thinking and motor performance in their study and daily routine were more balanced and resistant to falling than their peers who did not. This study may improve efficient treatments for fall prevention and balance. Future research could investigate the complex nature of additional DT that may be complicated by gender and BMI outside of the normal range.
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.