ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Estimating and interpreting how humans prioritize multiple movement goals during walking.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWalking requires managing competing movement goals shaped by the demands of everyday activity. Several important goals during overground walking include maintaining a desired walking speed, achieving an intended foot placement, preserving postural and locomotor balance, and reducing energy expenditure. Biomechanical simulation and motor control-based methods use goal-related cost functions or structured models to identify people’s movement priorities but are often restricted to simple movement scenarios and are currently impractical for broad deployment.
methodsHere, we systematically vary four movement goals during an overground walking experiment, characterize the resulting trade-offs in spatiotemporal gait metrics, and show that these trade-offs are sufficient to estimate participants’ perceived ranking of movement goals.
resultsGait metrics across participants became more heterogenous as combinations of movement goal prompts became more complex, suggesting person-specific movement strategies. Participants’ perceived prioritization of movement goals showed systematic associations with corresponding gait metrics, with the strongest relationships observed for visually guided goals such as balance and foot placement. Subject-agnostic regression models estimated the perceived order of importance of movement goals with 21% error, and subject-specific models reduced this error to 11%.
conclusionsThis work establishes an approach for estimation of movement priorities in young, healthy adults using simple gait metrics and provides a framework that could inform future studies beyond the laboratory.
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.