Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Recent studies have investigated bilateral gaits based on the causality analysis of kinetic (or kinematic) signals recorded using both feet. However, these approaches have not considered the influence of their simultaneous causation, which might lead to inaccurate causality inference. Furthermore, the causal interaction of these signals has not been investigated within their frequency domain. Therefore, in this study we attempted to employ a causal-decomposition approach to analyze bilateral gait. The vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) signals of Parkinson's disease (PD) patients and healthy control (HC) individuals were taken as an example to illustrate this method. To achieve this, we used ensemble empirical mode decomposition to decompose the left and right VGRF signals into intrinsic mode functions (IMFs) from the high to low frequency bands. The causal interaction strength (CIS) between each pair of IMFs was then assessed through the use of their instantaneous phase dependency. The results show that the CISes between pairwise IMFs decomposed in the high frequency band of VGRF signals can not only markedly distinguish PD patients from HC individuals, but also found a significant correlation with disease progression, while other pairwise IMFs were not able to produce this. In sum, we found for the first time that the frequency specific causality of bilateral gait may reflect the health status and disease progression of individuals. This finding may help to understand the underlying mechanisms of walking and walking-related diseases, and offer broad applications in the fields of medicine and engineering.
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.