ArticleGait & posture2026
Links between central visual field loss and movement processing during walking.
Article in Gait & posture, 2026. 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
Abstract
backgroundCentral visual field loss (CFL) is the most common irreversible visual impairment in aging and is associated with higher fall risk and concerns about falling. This study explored the links between CFL severity, functional balance, and walking-related attentional processing implicated in reduced gait performance.
methodsIn Study 1, 29 individuals with CFL and 29 age-matched controls completed the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test. In Study 2, 10 CFL participants and 10 controls performed the TUG while acceleration data were collected from head and trunk IMUs. For both studies, we assessed visual impairment severity (contrast sensitivity) and participants' attentional processing during walking (Gait-Specific Attentional Profile, G-SAP).
resultsBoth groups showed positive correlations between TUG duration and G-SAP subscales. G-SAP scores were lower in CFL participants with worse contrast sensitivity indicating reduced cognitive processing during walking. Worse contrast sensitivity was also associated with greater head and trunk acceleration and acceleration variability during walking, suggesting reduced gait stability. Higher rumination and conscious movement processing scores also correlated with improved segmental control in CFL. SIGNIFICANCE: Increased cognitive processing of gait is associated with impaired functional balance. This association appears to be reversed in CFL, with severe visual deficit diverting cognitive resources from movement control. This altered strategy may prioritise the acquisition and processing of visuospatial information in CFL. The observed postural instability with increasing CFL severity and a lack of excessive cognitive involvement in movement control suggest heightened gait-specific attention could be leveraged for balance and gait training in CFL.
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.