ArticleBMC geriatrics2025
Extracted step parameters during the timed up and go test discriminate between groups with different levels of cognitive ability-a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05893524 (Uppsala-Dalarna Dementia and Gait Project), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Uppsala-Dalarna Dementia and Gait Project
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- MRI-based cerebrospinal fluid volumetric indices for predicting tap test response in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Observational
- Gait and movement analysis for discrimination between people with dementia and healthy control persons based on pose estimation and machine learning.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2026Article
- The Relationship Between Gait Task Performance and Plasma Biomarkers for Alzheimer's Disease in Cognitively Unimpaired Older Adults and Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Article
- 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
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIdentifying cognitive impairment at an early stage is important to enable preventive treatment and lifestyle changes. As gait deviations precede cognitive impairment, the aim of this study was to investigate if step parameters during different Timed Up and Go (TUG) conditions could discriminate between people with different cognitive ability.
methodsParticipants (N = 304) were divided into the following groups: (1) controls, n = 50, mean age:73, 44% women; (2) Subjective cognitive Impairment (SCI), n = 71, mean age:67, 45% women; (3) Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), n = 126, mean age: 73, 42% women; and (4) dementia disorders, n = 57, mean age: 78, 51% women. Participants conducted TUG and two motor-cognitive TUG-conditions: TUG while naming animals (TUGdt-NA) and reciting months in reverse order (TUGdt-MB). Tests were video recorded for data extraction of valid spatiotemporal parameters: step length, step width, step duration, single step duration and double step duration. Step length was investigated with the step length/body height ratio (step length divided by body height). Logistic regression models (adjusted for age, sex and education) investigated associations between step parameters and dichotomous variables of groups adjacent in cognitive ability: dementia disorders vs. MCI, MCI vs. SCI, and SCI vs. controls. Results were presented as standardized odds ratios (sORs), with 95% confidence intervals (CI
resultsStep length showed greatest overall ability to significantly discriminate between adjacent groups (sOR ≤ . 67, CI
conclusionsThe results indicate that step length may be important to assess during TUG, for discrimination between groups with different cognitive ability; and that the presented cut-off has potential to aid early detection of cognitive impairment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05893524 (retrospectively registered 08/06/23).
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.