ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Validating wearable step counts in multiple sclerosis research: a replication study.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 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.
- Association Between Neurofilament Light Chain and Real-World Ambulatory Function in Progressive MS.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2026Article
- Stride-level measurement of gait as an early sensitive marker of disability progression in ambulatory patients with multiple sclerosis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: For people with multiple sclerosis (MS), mobility impairment is common and a significant contributor to reduced quality of life. With advancements in wearable technology, step count data has emerged as a promising method to track mobility and monitor functional decline. However, studies comparing the replicability of wearable mobility data using varying devices remain limited in MS populations. Methods: This study investigates the reliability of step count data and its associations with clinical outcomes in MS patients using two independent cohorts with different wearable devices: California (CA) ( Results: Analysis of the VA cohort revealed similar average daily step counts to those seen in the CA cohort (6,010 vs. 5,478 steps/day). Step count variability (standard deviation) decreased with increasing EDSS in both cohorts. Step counts in the VA cohort were significantly correlated with EDSS ( Discussion: The step count analyses from two different wearable devices show replicable associations with clinical and patient-reported outcomes in MS, highlighting their promise as digital biomarkers for clinical monitoring and care, rehabilitation, and patient self-management.
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.