Home › Research › Digital health tools
Gait variability in people with neurological disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Moon Y, Sung J, An R, Hernandez ME, Sosnoff JJ.. Human movement science, 2016-03-26
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
There has been growing evidence showing gait variability provides unique information about gait characteristics in neurological disorders. This study systemically reviewed and quantitatively synthesized (via meta-analysis) existing evidence on gait variability in various neurological diseases, including Alzheimer's disease (AD), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), cerebellar ataxia (CA), Huntington's disease (HD), multiple sclerosis (MS), and Parkinson's disease (PD). Keyword search were conducted in PubMed, Web of science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Library. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate the pooled effect size for gait variability for each neurological group. Meta-regression was performed to compare gait variability across multiple groups with neurological diseases. Gait variability of 777 patients with AD, ALS, CA, HD, MS, or PD participating in 25 studies was included in meta-analysis. All pathological groups had increased amount of gait variability and loss of fractal structure of gait dynamics compared to healthy controls, and gait variability differentiated distinctive neurological conditions. The HD groups had the highest alterations in gait variability among all pathological groups, whereas the PD, AD and MS groups had the lowest. Interventions that aim to improve gait function in patients with neurological disorders should consider the heterogeneous relationship between gait variability and neurological conditions.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Moon, Y., Sung, J., An, R., Hernandez, M. E., & Sosnoff, J. J. (2016). Gait variability in people with neurological disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Human movement science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2016.03.010
Vancouver
Moon Y, Sung J, An R, Hernandez ME, Sosnoff JJ. Gait variability in people with neurological disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Human movement science. 2016. doi:10.1016/j.humov.2016.03.010. PMID: 27023045.
BibTeX
@article{moon2016-27023045,
author = {Moon, Y. and Sung, J. and An, R. and Hernandez, M. E. and Sosnoff, J. J.},
title = {{Gait variability in people with neurological disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis}},
journal = {Human movement science},
year = {2016},
doi = {10.1016/j.humov.2016.03.010},
pmid = {27023045},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2016.03.010}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- All pathological groups had increased amount of gait variability and loss of fractal structure of gait dynamics compared to healthy controls, and gait variability differentiated distinctive neurological conditions.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →
Study details
- Study designmeta-analysis
- Participants777
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 72/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for effect reported because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 42 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 72 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Human movement science) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A meta-analysis pooling many studies |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2016 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 777 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 27023045) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 42 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 42 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 72 out of 100. |
| Total | 72 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Digital health tools
Also tagged “exercise-training”
125 studies in the library carry the topic tag “exercise-training”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 125 tagged studies.