ArticleScience progress
A pilot study of cross-sectional design assessing gait kinetics during dual task in different age groups.
Article in Science progress. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectiveWith increasing global aging, the relationship between gait and cognitive function has become a research priority. Although spatiotemporal differences in dual-task (DT) gait are well-documented, studies on kinetics remain limited. This study aimed to explore age-related changes in kinetics under cognitive load.MethodsThis study is a prospective cross-sectional study. Thirty-six participants were categorized into 3 groups: young (YG, 18-37 years), middle-aged (MG, 38-57 years), and elderly (OG, ≥ 58 years), with 12 in each group. Gait tests were conducted under single-task (ST) and DT conditions. The DT involved counting down by 1 from a random number of 100 while walking. Kinetics includes forces, moments, power, and center of mass (CoM). Repeated measures general linear model was used to assess effects of tasks on age groups. Group differences in DT gait cost (DTGC) were examined by MANOVA with Bonferroni corrections.ResultsOG showed increased ankle medial-lateral force, decreased knee external rotation moment (p = 0.049), and reduced hip anterior force and power (p < 0.01). MG exhibited reduced hip power (15.4%) and force in multiple directions (p < 0.05), while YG had decreased hip abduction-adduction moment (p = 0.004). In the medial-lateral of CoM, OG had significantly lower motion of range in ST than in DT (p = 0.028). DTGC comparisons showed that OG had the biggest kinetic changes under DT, MG followed, and YG had the least impact.ConclusionsThis study showed that the impact of cognitive load on kinetics differs across age groups. The OG relied on ankle joint compensation but with lower efficiency, leading to decreased gait stability. The MG adjusted gait using both the ankle and hip joints, while the YG showed minimal changes and stable gait. DT gait assessment shows that older adults use different strategies in their lower limbs. This highlights its potential to detect mobility decline early.
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.