Trial reportPloS one2025
Walking cadence as a measure of activity intensity and impact on functional capacity for prefrail and frail older adults.
Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Relaxed Stiffness of Lower Extremity Muscles and Step Width Variability as Key Differences Between Sarcopenia and Dynapenia in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Walking cadence has been suggested as a measure of activity intensity; however, it remains uncertain if prefrail and frail older adults can increase their walking cadence and if doing so leads to improvements in functional capacity. We aimed to determine if cadence can be increased and if this leads to improvement in functional capacity in prefrail and frail older adults. We performed a secondary data analysis of a walking intervention in prefrail and frail older adults living in retirement communities. Patients were randomized to Casual Speed Walking (CSW) and High-Intensity Walking (HIW) groups. Our primary outcome was improvement in 6-minute walk test distance above the minimally clinical important difference. We performed linear and logistic mixed-effects regressions to analyze our aims. 102 participants were included in the final analysis with 56 in the CSW group and 46 in the HIW group. Participants in the HIW group increased their walking cadence as compared to the CSW group during the intervention (HIW 100[88, 111] steps/min vs. CSW 77[65, 86] steps/min; P < 0.001). Participants that increased their walking cadence demonstrated an increased odds of improvement in their 6-minute walk test minimum clinically important difference (OR: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.033, 0.18; p = 0.005). Older adults can increase their walking cadence and walking cadence can serve as a surrogate measure of activity intensity during walking interventions. An increase of 14 steps/minute from their comfortable walking cadence increased the odds of improvement in 6-minute walk test minimum clinically important difference.
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.