ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Development and clinical validation of a stroke-specific Gait Deviation Index.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stroke affects over 101 million individuals worldwide, leaving many to cope with long-term consequences. These often include physical and cognitive impairments such as muscle weakness, loss of coordination, and challenges in performing daily activities. Several quantitative indices have been developed to objectively quantify gait deviations with a focus on ensuring ease of use and accessibility within clinical settings. Among those, the most cited one is the Gait Deviation Index (GDI), originally developed with data from a population of children with cerebral palsy. This characteristic probably reduces the ability of the GDI to interpret stroke-specific deviations. To overcome this limitation, one possibility is to derive a GDI for each specific population, as demonstrated for spinal cord injury. In this study, we developed a stroke-specific GDI (STR-GDI) considering a database of 22 healthy controls and 69 post-stroke subjects. The STR-GDI with a 17-feature basis provided a more reliable reconstruction of non-native data compared to the 15-feature original GDI basis. Both GDI and STR-GDI showed excellent reliability across limbs and datasets (ICC = 0.99), although STR-GDI showed higher ICCs in the test set for the non-paretic limbs (0.95 compared to 0.91 for the GDI). Regression models between GDI and STR-GDI yielded R2 values of 0.76 and 0.81, respectively for the paretic and non-paretic limbs. The linear regressions between indexes and clinical and gait variables were less consistent but still meaningful, with R2 values lower than 0.23. These results may indicate that these metrics offer complementary information, and their combined use could provide a more comprehensive understanding of post-stroke gait impairments. STR-GDI showed slightly higher correlations than GDI with the lower-limb Fugl-Meyer Assessment, the percentage of stance phase, step length, and cadence. In conclusion, in this study we successfully adapted the original GDI methodology to create a STR-GDI to capture gait deviations specific to post-stroke individuals. This study makes a meaningful methodological contribution by developing and validating a complete automatic pipeline that could be adapted to generate other condition-specific GDIs for other neurological or musculoskeletal disorders, provided that datasets are available. Future work will expand the STR-GDI using a larger and more diverse stroke population, assess its inter-session reliability, and develop a compatible version for inertial measurement units and markerless motion capture systems, facilitating broader clinical and real-world applications.
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.