The age-related contribution of cognitive function to dual-task gait in middle-aged adults in Spain: observations from a population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Poor dual-task gait performance is associated with a risk of falls and cognitive decline in adults aged 65 years or older. When and why dual-task gait performance begins to deteriorate is unknown. This study aimed to characterise the relationships between age, dual-task gait, and cognitive function in middle age (ie, aged 40-64 years). METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from community-dwelling adults aged 40-64 years that took part in the Barcelona Brain Health Initiative (BBHI) study, an ongoing longitudinal cohort study in Barcelona, Spain. Participants were eligible for inclusion if they were able to walk independently without assistance and had completed assessments of both gait and cognition at the time of analysis and ineligble if they could not understand the study protocol, had any clinically diagnosed neurological or psychiatric diseases, were cognitively impaired, or had lower-extremity pain, osteoarthritis, or rheumatoid arthritis that could cause abnormal gait. Stride time and stride time variability were measured under single-task (ie, walking only) and dual-task (ie, walking while performing serial subtractions) conditions. Dual-task cost (DTC; the percentage increase in the gait outcomes from single-task to dual-task conditions) to each gait outcome was calculated and used as the primary measure in analyses. Global cognitive function and composite scores of five cognitive domains were derived from neuropsychological testing. We used locally estimated scatterplot smoothing to characterise the relationship between age and dual-task gait, and structural equation modelling to establish whether cognitive function mediated the association between observed biological age and dual tasks. FINDINGS: 996 people were recruited to the BBHI study between May 5, 2018, and July 7, 2020, of which 640 participants completed gait and cognitive assessments during this time (mean 24 days [SD 34] between first and second visit) and were included in our analysis (342 men and 298 women). Non-linear associations were observed between age and dual-task performance. Starting at 54 years, the DTC to stride time (β=0·27 [95% CI 0·11 to 0·36]; p<0·0001) and stride time variability (0·24 [0·08 to 0·32]; p=0·0006) increased with advancing age. In individuals aged 54 years or older, decreased global cognitive function correlated with increased DTC to stride time (β=-0·27 [-0·38 to -0·11]; p=0·0006) and increased DTC to stride time variability (β=-0·19 [-0·28 to -0·08]; p=0·0002). INTERPRETATION: Dual-task gait performance begins to deteriorate in the sixth decade of life and, after this point, interindividual variance in cognition explains a substantial portion of dual-task performance. FUNDING: La Caixa Foundation, Institut Guttmann, and Fundació Abertis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".