Home › Research › Digital health tools
Talking while walking: the effect of a dual task in aging and Alzheimer's disease
Camicioli R, Howieson D, Lehman S, Kaye J.. Neurology, 1997-04-01
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
We determined the effects of distraction on gait in healthy elderly subjects and Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. The effects of simultaneous performance of a verbal fluency task (effect of reciting male or female names) on the time and number of steps taken to walk 30 feet were compared using a repeated-measures design with between-group comparison between community-dwelling healthy old old (oOld; n = 20; mean age +/- SD, 86 +/- 4.4), healthy young old (yOld; n = 23; mean age +/- SD, 72 +/- 3.6), and probable AD subjects without parkinsonism (n = 15; mean age +/- SD, 74 +/- 13). AD patients slowed more than the yOld (p = 0.005) and the oOld (p = 0.002). The yOld and oOld did not differ from each other (p = 0.68). Mean (+/-SD) differences in time were as follows: yOld, -2.2 +/- 1.9; oOld, -1.6 +/- 2.0; AD, -7.1 +/- 9.2 seconds. The change in steps did not differ between groups. Walking speed of AD patients slowed more than that of elderly subjects during the dual task. This may contribute to the risk of falls in AD.
Key findings
- The yOld and oOld did not differ from each other (p = 0.68).
- Mean (+/-SD) differences in time were as follows: yOld, -2.2 +/- 1.9; oOld, -1.6 +/- 2.0; AD, -7.1 +/- 9.2 seconds.
- The change in steps did not differ between groups.
- Walking speed of AD patients slowed more than that of elderly subjects during the dual task.
- This may contribute to the risk of falls in AD.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →
Study details
- Participants20
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 47/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded 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 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 1997 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 20 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 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 9109884) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 27 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100. |
| Total | 47 / 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.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Camicioli, R., Howieson, D., Lehman, S., & Kaye, J. (1997). Talking while walking: the effect of a dual task in aging and Alzheimer's disease. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.48.4.955
Vancouver
Camicioli R, Howieson D, Lehman S, Kaye J. Talking while walking: the effect of a dual task in aging and Alzheimer's disease. Neurology. 1997. doi:10.1212/wnl.48.4.955. PMID: 9109884.
BibTeX
@article{camicioli1997-9109884,
author = {Camicioli, R. and Howieson, D. and Lehman, S. and Kaye, J.},
title = {{Talking while walking: the effect of a dual task in aging and Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Neurology},
year = {1997},
doi = {10.1212/wnl.48.4.955},
pmid = {9109884},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.48.4.955}
}
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.