ArticleResearch square2025
Verbal Fluency Dual-Tasks Show Greater Age-Related Cognitive-Motor Interference: A Meta-Analysis of Walking Performance.
Article in Research square, 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A substantial body of literature has examined gait during cognitive dual-tasking in younger and older adults. However, it remains unclear how, and to what extent, different cognitive tasks uniquely influence gait. This meta-analysis quantified age-related differences in gait speed during dual-task walking. Importantly, we examined cognitive task as a potential moderator. We searched Web of Science for studies comparing young and older adults during single-task and dual-task walking conditions. Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria, representing 544 young adults (mean age range: 20-31 years) and 511 older adults (mean age range: 62-85 years). Studies employed primarily serial subtraction tasks (n = 12) and verbal fluency tasks (n = 8); however, one study used digit vigilance, and another used a texting paradigm during walking. Random-effects meta-analysis using standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) revealed a significant overall effect (g = -0.2612, 95% CI [-0.4914, -0.0310], p = 0.0261), indicating greater dual-task costs in older adults compared to younger adults with a small to medium effect size. Substantial heterogeneity was observed across studies (I
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.