The Effects of an 8-Week Cognitive-Motor Training Program on Proprioception and Postural Control Under Single and Dual Task in Older Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. The Effect of Periodic Assessments and Verbal Feedback on Physical Function and Adherence in Healthy Adults Aged ≥65: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026
   Article
2. A Standard Operating Procedure for Dual-Task Training to Improve Physical and Cognitive Function in Older Adults: A Scoping Review.Brain sciences · 2025
   Review
3. Motor imagery enhances core training effects on lumbar proprioception in elite swimmers: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in physiology · 2025
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as