ArticlePloS one2025
Effects of using conventional assistive devices on spatiotemporal gait parameters of adults with neurological disorders: A systematic review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- Fatigue-Inducing Protocols in Parkinson's Disease: Implications for Gait Assessment and Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review.Parkinson's disease · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Individuals with neurological disorders often experience gait impairments that contribute to increased disability, long-term care risk, and higher healthcare costs. The prescription of assistive devices is a commonly employed strategy to compensate for gait impairments in this population. Despite being recommended by various guidelines, there are limited recommendations for prescribing these devices. Furthermore, the effects of using assistive devices on the gait of individuals with neurological disorders are poorly known. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to investigate the immediate, short, and long-term effects of using conventional assistive devices (e.g., canes, crutches, walkers) on gait parameters of adults with neurological disorders. This Systematic review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (registration number: CRD42024542695) and was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). Experimental studies that investigated the effects of using conventional assistive devices on the gait of individuals with neurological disorders will be included. Electronic searches will be conducted in Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE Ovid), Excerpta Medica Database (Embase Classic + Embase Ovid), Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Scientific Electronic Library Online (Scielo), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL Database), Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS) and gray literature. The reference lists of the included studies will be manually searched. Two trained independent reviewers will select the studies, extract the data, and assess the methodological quality of the included studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tools. Disagreements between reviewers will be solved through consensus or by a third independent reviewer. The quality of the evidence will be assessed (GRADE). If a sufficient number of comparable studies are available, subgroup analysis will be conducted and we will consider doing a meta-analysis if the studies are homogeneous. The review will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA 2020 statement). The results of this review will provide useful information about the effects of assistive devices on gait in different neurological disorders comprehensively and systematically. Investigating the immediate, short and long-term effects may generate useful information for making clinical decisions related to the training time for using these devices. If a meta-analysis is possible, the prescription of these devices could be improved based on knowledge of their effects. Finally, the results of this systematic review will identify gaps in the literature and guide future research.
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.