Observational studyPhysical therapy2021
Timed "Up & Go" Dual-Task Tests: Age- and Sex-Specific Reference Values and Test-Retest Reliability in Cognitively Healthy Controls.
Observational study in Physical therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05373160 (Determination of Age- and Gender-specific Reference Values of Different Functional Tests With or Without Cognitive Dual-task in Young Adults), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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.
Determination of Age- and Gender-specific Reference Values of Different Functional Tests With or Without Cognitive Dual-task in Young Adults
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Effects of a multicomponent training and a detraining period on cognitive and functional performance of older adults at risk of frailty.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2025Trial
- Reliability of functional physical performance tests adapted in a remote format for older people with a history of falls.European geriatric medicine · 2026Article
- Advancing standardisation of motor-cognitive dual task walking assessments: a scoping review of methodological practices in healthy older adults.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Ageing changes the proprioceptive contribution to balance control under different types of mastoid vibration: A cross-sectional study.Experimental physiology · 2025Article
- Extracted step parameters during the timed up and go test discriminate between groups with different levels of cognitive ability-a cross-sectional study.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- The Timed Up and Go dual-task test's cognitive and motor outcomes show promising test-retest reliability in older adults with perceived memory impairment.Frontiers in aging · 2025Article
- Article
- Dual-tasking interference is exacerbated outdoors: A pilot study.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2023Article
- A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Among Undenatured Collagen Type II, Glucosamine Sulfate, and Diacerein on Osteoarthritic Knee Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JB & JS open accessArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of the study was to establish reference values for the Uppsala-Dalarna Dementia and Gait (UDDGait) Timed "Up & Go" dual-task (TUGdt) test variables in cognitively healthy adults and to assess these variables' test-retest reliability.
methodsFor reference values, 166 participants were recruited with approximately equal numbers and proportions of women and men in the age groups 50 to 59, 60 to 69, 70 to 79, and 80+ years (mean age = 70 years, age range = 50-91 years, 51% women). For reliability testing, 43 individuals (mean age = 69 years, age range = 50-89 years, 51% women) were recruited. Two dt tests were carried out: TUGdt naming animals and TUGdt months backward, representing 8 test variables: time scores, costs (the relative difference between single-task and dt time scores), "number of animals," "number of months," "animals/10 seconds ," and "months/10 seconds ." Reference ranges for the variables were established by quantile regression in age- and sex-specific groups. For reliability, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), standard error of measurement, minimal detectable change, and Bland-Altman plots were used.
resultsReference values for the TUGdt test variables are presented for the 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles. The reliability of TUGdt time scores was excellent (ICCs between 0.85 and 0.86). "Number of animals" and "animals/10 seconds" as well as "months/10 seconds" showed fair to good levels of reliability (ICCs between 0.45 and 0.58), whereas the reliability for both cost measures and "number of months" was poor (ICCs between 0.34 and 0.39).
conclusionNormative reference values, potentially useful for clinical and research purposes, were presented in 4 age- and sex-specific groups from 50 years and older. Reliability for the test variables varied between poor and excellent, the lower estimates partly explained by some variables being the ratio of 2 other variables. In UDDGait, TUGdt tests are intended for diagnostic and predictive purposes, for which these tests are promising and require further investigations. IMPACT: Normative reference values and test-retest reliability results for the UDDGait TUGdt test variables were presented. These results should be useful for both clinical and research purposes.
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.