NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Background and purposeRecent findings suggest that a gait assessment at a discrete moment in a clinic or laboratory setting may not reflect functional, everyday mobility. As a step towards better understanding gait during daily life in neurological populations, we compared gait measures that best discriminated people with multiple sclerosis (MS) and people with Parkinson's Disease (PD) from their respective, age-matched, healthy control subjects (MS-Ctl, PD-Ctl) in laboratory tests versus a week of daily life monitoring.MethodsWe recruited 15 people with MS (age mean ± SD: 49 ± 10 years), 16 MS-Ctl (45 ± 11 years), 16 people with idiopathic PD (71 ± 5 years), and 15 PD-Ctl (69 ± 7 years). Subjects wore 3 inertial sensors (one each foot and lower back) in the laboratory followed by 7 days during daily life. Mann-Whitney U test and area under the curve (AUC) compared differences between PD and PD-Ctl, and between MS and MS-Ctl in the laboratory and in daily life.ResultsParticipants wore sensors for 60-68 h in daily life. Measures that best discriminated gait characteristics in people with MS and PD from their respective control groups were different between the laboratory gait test and a week of daily life. Specifically, the toe-off angle best discriminated MS versus MS-Ctl in the laboratory (AUC [95% CI] = 0.80 [0.63-0.96]) whereas gait speed in daily life (AUC = 0.84 [0.69-1.00]). In contrast, the lumbar coronal range of motion best discriminated PD versus PD-Ctl in the laboratory (AUC = 0.78 [0.59-0.96]) whereas foot-strike angle in daily life (AUC = 0.84 [0.70-0.98]). AUCs were larger in daily life compared to the laboratory.ConclusionsLarger AUC for daily life gait measures compared to the laboratory gait measures suggest that daily life monitoring may be more sensitive to impairments from neurological disease, but each neurological disease may require different gait outcome measures.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.