The Use of Rhythmic Auditory Stimulation on Gait Parameters in Parkinson’s Disease: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disorder that commonly affects the basal ganglia dopaminergic signaling system, which can contribute to moderate-severe gait impairments in individuals. Many therapies have been proposed to mitigate this effect, however, there are often issues to consider such as the relative invasiveness of the procedure and other side effects. Rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS) is a non-invasive therapeutic avenue with the potential to mitigate associated impairments in gait parameters. This review aims to evaluate the recent literature regarding the efficacy of this intervention in improving gait parameters in individuals with Parkinson’s disease. Methods: PubMed and OVID Medline databases were consulted to find nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) written in the English language, published between 2012 and 2022 and subject to a strict inclusion criterion. Keywords included, but were not limited to, “Parkinson’s disease”, “rhythmic auditory stimulation”, and “gait”. Outcomes were critically analyzed, and their implications were evaluated in the context of existing research within this field. Results: Many of the studies showed a strong immediate improvement in several of the gait parameters, such as speed, stride length, cadence, balance, and falls, identified across a variety of RCT designs. However, many reviewed studies included a small sample size (n ≤ 30) and showed no significant outcomes in specific parameters, and several lacked an adequate follow-up period, limiting assessment of long-term efficacy. Discussion: The findings showed strong implications surrounding the use of rhythmic cues to prime the motor system to facilitate gait relearning and motor rehabilitation, at least in the short term. This method can be applied in future therapeutic avenues to address gait rehabilitation in a non-invasive manner. Conclusion: Existing literature demonstrates that RAS therapy is a promising method to incorporate into such therapeutic avenues; however, further research for the long-term efficacy of this approach is required.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".