ArticleRoyal Society open science2020
Gait coordination in overground walking with a virtual reality avatar.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gait analysis under the lens of statistical physics.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022Review
- Gait coordination in overground walking with a virtual reality avatar.Royal Society open science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Little information is currently available on interpersonal gait synchronization in overground walking. This is caused by difficulties in continuous gait monitoring over many steps while ensuring repeatability of experimental conditions. These challenges could be overcome by using immersive virtual reality (VR), assuming it offers ecological validity. To this end, this study provides some of the first evidence of gait coordination patterns for overground walking dyads in VR. Six subjects covered the total distance of 27 km while walking with a pacer. The pacer was either a real human subject or their anatomically and biomechanically representative VR avatar driven by an artificial intelligence algorithm. Side-by-side and front-to-back arrangements were tested without and with the instruction to synchronize steps. Little evidence of spontaneous gait coordination was found in both visual conditions, but persistent gait coordination patterns were found in the case of intentional synchronization. Front-to-back rather than side-by-side arrangement consistently yielded in the latter case higher mean synchronization strength index. Although the mean magnitude of synchronization strength index was overall comparable in both visual conditions when walking under the instruction to synchronize steps, quantitative and qualitative differences were found which might be associated with common limitations of VR solutions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.