SynthesisJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2024
Effectiveness of sensor-based interventions in improving gait and balance performance in older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effects of Wearable Devices on Parkinson Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Within the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health Framework.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of task-oriented training on balance, gait, and fall in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2026Pooled it
- Sensor for sports applications: monitoring and assessment of intrinsic capacity enhancement in older adults during brisk walking.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Edge-AI Instrumentation Framework for Multimodal Biometric Sensing in Active Aging Environments.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Development, Reliability, and Validity Assessment of a Portable 3D Camera-Based System for Quantifying Postural Sway and Balance.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Phase-Specific Biomechanical Reorganization After Robotic Rehabilitation in Patients with Stroke: A Sensor-Derived Waveform Analysis.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Sensor-based digital health technologies to capture endpoints in recent clinical trials: a scoping review.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Wearable Sensor Technology and Biomechanical Gait Analysis in Post-Stroke Rehabilitation: A Review with Implications for the Saudi Healthcare System.Neurosciences (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) · 2026Review
- IoT-Based Intervention and Home Support to Address Frailty-Related Vulnerability and Well-Being in Older Adults Living in Rural Areas.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Sensor-Derived Trunk Stability and Gait Recovery: Evidence of Neuromechanical Associations Following Intensive Robotic Rehabilitation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Reproducible candidate kinematic-electromyographic waveform markers of post-stroke gait from public multimodal waveform exports.Frontiers in medical technology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence and telemedicine in elderly healthcare: A mixed-methods study.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Review
- Functional Mobility Studies in Younger Adults: Instrumented Timed Up and Go (iTUG) Test Using Inertial Devices.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical and instrument-based assessment of balance, gait, and motor functions in pediatric cerebral palsy: A systematic review.Wearable technologies · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSensor-based interventions (SI) have been suggested as an alternative rehabilitation treatment to improve older adults' functional performance. However, the effectiveness of different sensor technologies in improving gait and balance remains unclear and requires further investigation.
methodsTen databases (Academic Search Premier; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Complete; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; PubMed; Web of Science; OpenDissertations; Open grey; ProQuest; and Grey literature report) were searched for relevant articles published up to December 20, 2022. Conventional functional assessments, including the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, normal gait speed, Berg Balance Scale (BBS), 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), and Falling Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I), were used as the evaluation outcomes reflecting gait and balance performance. We first meta-analyzed the effectiveness of SI, which included optical sensors (OPTS), perception sensors (PCPS), and wearable sensors (WS), compared with control groups, which included non-treatment intervention (NTI) and traditional physical exercise intervention (TPEI). We further conducted sub-group analysis to compare the effectiveness of SI (OPTS, PCPS, and WS) with TPEI groups and compared each SI subtype with control (NTI and TPEI) and TPEI groups.
resultsWe scanned 6255 articles and performed meta-analyses of 58 selected trials (sample size = 2713). The results showed that SI groups were significantly more effective than control or TPEI groups (p < 0.000) in improving gait and balance performance. The subgroup meta-analyses between OPTS groups and TPEI groups revealed clear statistically significant differences in effectiveness for TUG test (mean difference (MD) = - 0.681 s; p < 0.000), normal gait speed (MD = 4.244 cm/s; p < 0.000), BBS (MD = 2.325; p = 0.001), 6MWT (MD = 25.166 m; p < 0.000), and FES-I scores (MD = - 2.036; p = 0.036). PCPS groups also presented statistically significant differences with TPEI groups in gait and balance assessments for normal gait speed (MD = 4.382 cm/s; p = 0.034), BBS (MD = 1.874; p < 0.000), 6MWT (MD = 21.904 m; p < 0.000), and FES-I scores (MD = - 1.161; p < 0.000), except for the TUG test (MD = - 0.226 s; p = 0.106). There were no statistically significant differences in TUG test (MD = - 1.255 s; p = 0.101) or normal gait speed (MD = 6.682 cm/s; p = 0.109) between WS groups and control groups.
conclusionsSI with biofeedback has a positive effect on gait and balance improvement among a mixed population of older adults. Specifically, OPTS and PCPS groups were statistically better than TPEI groups at improving gait and balance performance, whereas only the group comparison in BBS and 6MWT can reach the minimal clinically important difference. Moreover, WS groups showed no statistically or clinically significant positive effect on gait and balance improvement compared with control groups. More studies are recommended to verify the effectiveness of specific SI. Research registration PROSPERO platform: CRD42022362817. Registered on 7/10/2022.
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.