Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 159

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Effect of a Task‐Oriented Walking Intervention on Improving Balance Self‐Efficacy Poststroke: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Salbach, Nancy M., Mayo, Nancy E., Robichaud‐Ekstrand, Sylvie, Hanley, James A., Richards, Carol L., Wood‐Dauphinee, Sharon·2005·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of a task‐oriented walking intervention in improving balance self‐efficacy in persons with stroke and to determine whether effects were task‐specific, influenced by baseline level of self‐efficacy and associated with changes in walking and balance capacity. Design: Secondary analysis of a two‐center, observer‐blinded, randomized, controlled trial. Setting: General community. Participants: Ninety‐one individuals with a residual walking deficit within 1 year of a first or recurrent stroke. Intervention: Task‐oriented interventions targeting walking or upper extremity (UE) function were provided three times a week for 6 weeks. Measurements: Activities‐specific Balance Confidence Scale, Six‐Minute Walk Test, 5‐m walk, Berg Balance Scale, and Timed “Up and Go” administered at baseline and postintervention. Results: The walking intervention was associated with a significantly greater average proportional change in balance self‐efficacy than the UE intervention. Treatment effects were largest in persons with low self‐efficacy at baseline and for activities relating to tasks practiced. In the walking group, change in balance self‐efficacy correlated with change in functional walking capacity (correlation coefficient=0.45, 95% confidence interval=0.16–0.68). Results of multivariable modeling suggested effect modification by the baseline level of depressive symptoms and a prognostic influence of age, sex, comorbidity, time poststroke, and functional mobility on change in self‐efficacy. Conclusion: Task‐oriented walking retraining enhances balance self‐efficacy in community‐dwelling individuals with chronic stroke. Benefits may be partially the result of improvement in walking capacity. The influence of baseline level of self‐efficacy, depressive symptoms, and prognostic variables on treatment effects are of clinical importance and must be verified in future studies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53203.x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 159

Metadata

Authors
Salbach, N. M., Mayo, N. E., Robichaud‐Ekstrand, S., Hanley, J. A., Richards, C. L., & Wood‐Dauphinee, S.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-03-30
Volume
53
Issue
4
Pages
576-582
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W1646472180
Cited by
159
References
3
FWCI
9.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Effect of a Task‐Oriented Walking Intervention on Improving Balance Self‐Efficacy Poststroke: A Randomized, Controlled Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53203.x
The paper
Salbach, N. M., Mayo, N. E., Robichaud‐Ekstrand, S., Hanley, J. A., Richards, C. L., & Wood‐Dauphinee, S. (2005). The Effect of a Task‐Oriented Walking Intervention on Improving Balance Self‐Efficacy Poststroke: A Randomized, Controlled Trial. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53203.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.