How Reliable and Valid are Dual-Task Cost Metrics? A Meta-analysis of Locomotor-Cognitive Dual-Task Paradigms

Pike, Alycia; McGuckian, Thomas B.; Steenbergen, Bert; Cole, Michael H.; Wilson, Peter H.

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2022.07.014

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Considering the number of studies in both single word and discourse categories (n = 10) that included appropriate control groups and the inconsistent findings with regard to presence/absence of dual-task effects across studies, the certainty of the findings in this segment of the stroke literature may be described as weak. We should note that issues of reliability in dual-task studies are evident in other populations (Pike et al, 2022).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Language-Specific Dual-Task Effects After Stroke: A Systematic Review

Salis

Jarrar

Murray

2023

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The dual-task paradigm has been frequently used to examine stroke-related deficits because it samples behavioral performance under conditions of distraction similar to functioning in real-life environments. This original systematic review synthesizes studies that examined dual-task effects involving spoken language production in adults affected by stroke, including transient ischemic attack (TIA) and poststroke aphasia. Method: Five databases were searched (inception to March 2022) for eligible peer-reviewed articles. The 21 included studies reported a total of 561 stroke participants. Thirteen studies focused on single word production, for example, word fluency, and eight on discourse production, for example, storytelling. Most studies included participants who had suffered a major stroke. Six studies focused on aphasia, whereas no study focused on TIA. A meta-analysis was not appropriate because of the heterogeneity of outcome measures. Results: Some single word production studies found dual-task language effects whereas others did not. This finding was compounded by the lack of appropriate control participants. Most single word and discourse studies utilized motoric tasks in the dual-task condition. Our certainty (or confidence) assessment was based on a methodological appraisal of each study and information about reliability/fidelity. As 10 of the 21 studies included appropriate control groups and limited reliability/fidelity information, the certainty of the findings may be described as weak. Conclusions: Language-specific dual-task costs were identified in single word studies, especially those that focused on aphasia as well as half of the nonaphasia studies. Unlike single word studies, nearly all studies of discourse showed dual-task decrements on at least some variables. Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.23605311

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Language-Specific Dual-Task Effects After Stroke: A Systematic Review

Salis

Jarrar

Murray

2023

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The values used were the single- and dual-task performance values and the proportional dual-task costs (pDTC/p-WTC), for both the motor and cognitive tasks. pDTCs are a reliable and valid metric to identify subtle changes in locomotion under dynamic environmental conditions ( Pike et al, 2022 ). The data were examined for missing data points and outliers.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The DCD dual-task research is, however, limited by a lack of consistent control for single-task differences ( Cherng et al, 2009 ; Tsai et al, 2009 ; Chen et al, 2012 ; Chen and Tsai, 2016 ; Jelsma et al, 2021 ) and a lack of calculation of proportional dual-task costs (pDTC). The pDTC metric typically involves the comparison of pure single-task performance with dual-task performance (pDTC) and controls for individual or group differences in baseline task performance ( Pike et al, 2022 ). Controlling for single-task performance is important for DCD research to ensure dual-task performance costs do not reflect differences in baseline performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Locomotor-cognitive dual-tasking in children with developmental coordination disorder

Subara-Zukic,

McGuckian,

Cole

et al. 2024

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionChildren with Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) demonstrate deficits in predictive motor control and aspects of cognitive control compared with their typically developing (TD) peers. Adjustment to dynamic environments depends on both aspects of control and the deficits for children with DCD may constrain their ability to perform daily actions that involve dual-tasking. Under the assumption that motor-cognitive integration is compromised in children with DCD, we examined proportional dual-task costs using a novel locomotor-cognitive dual-task paradigm that enlisted augmented reality. We expect proportional dual-task performance costs to be greater for children with DCD compared to their TD peers.MethodsParticipants were 34 children aged 6–12 years (16 TD, 18 DCD) who walked along a straight 12 m path under single- and dual-task conditions, the cognitive task being visual discrimination under simple or complex stimulus conditions presented via augmented reality. Dual-task performance was measured in two ways: first, proportional dual-task costs (pDTC) were computed for cognitive and gait outcomes and, second, within-trial costs (p-WTC) were measured as the difference on gait outcomes between pre- and post-stimulus presentation.ResultsOn measures of pDTC, TD children increased their double-limb support time when walking in response to a dual-task, while the children with DCD increased their locomotor velocity. On p-WTC, both groups increased their gait variability (step length and step width) when walking in response to a dual-task, of which the TD group had a larger proportional change than the DCD group. Greater pDTCs on motor rather than cognitive outcomes were consistent across groups and method of dual-task performance measurement.DiscussionContrary to predictions, our results failed to support dramatic differences in locomotor-cognitive dual-task performance between children with DCD and TD, with both groups tending to priorities the cognitive over the motor task. Inclusion of a within-trial calculation of dual-task interference revealed an expectancy effect for both groups in relation to an impending visual stimulus. It is recommended that dual-task paradigms in the future continue to use augmented reality to present the cognitive task and consider motor tasks of sufficient complexity to probe the limits of performance in children with DCD.

show abstract