Gait dysfunction in Motoric cognitive risk syndrome
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Motoric cognitive risk (MCR) syndrome is a cognitive-motor syndrome associated with increased risk of transition to dementia. The clinical phenotype of MCR is not yet established. OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess clinical gait abnormalities in older adults with MCR. METHODS: Of the 522 community-dwelling non-demented adults aged 65 and older enrolled in the Central Control of Mobility in Aging study, 43 were diagnosed with MCR (47% women) based on presence of cognitive complaints and slow gait velocity (MCRv). Four additional subtypes of MCR were defined by substituting slow gait with short stride length (MCRsl, n = 41), slow swing time (MCRsw, n = 21), high stride length variability (MCRslv, n = 24), and high swing time variability (MCRswv, n = 25). The prevalence of clinical gait abnormalities (neurological or non-neurological) in MCR overall (n = 81) and subtypes was studied. We also examined if gait abnormalities predicted further cognitive and functional decline in MCR cases. RESULTS: Most clinical gait abnormalities were mild (walked without assistance) in the five MCR subtypes (44 to 61%). Neurological (range 24 to 46%) and non-neurological gait abnormalities (33 to 61%) were common in all MCR subtypes. Neurological gaits were most frequent in MCRsl (46%) and non-neurological gaits in MCRv (61%). Over a median 3.02 years of follow-up, presence of gait abnormality in MCR cases at baseline predicted worsening disability scores (estimate 0.17, p-value = 0.033) but not decline on cognitive scores (p-value = 0.056). CONCLUSION: Clinical gait abnormalities are common in MCR syndrome and its subtypes, and are associated with accelerated functional decline.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The STAMINA study was a 12-week, single-arm, open-label, pre-post pilot study in 12 older adults with slow gait speed and MCI.
“The STAMINA (Senolytics To Alleviate Mobility Issues and Neurological Impairments in Ageing) study is a 12-week, single-arm, open-label, pre-post pilot study implementing intermittent doses of DQ in 12 older adults aged ≥65 years with slow gait speed and MCI, which are both precursors to the development of Alzheimer’s disease.”
From A pilot study of senolytics to improve cognition and mobility in older adults at risk for Alzheimer's disease (2025) · cites this paper as [10]
The Methods (Study population; page unavailable) describe the Central Control of Mobility in Aging study, and the Abstract (Methods; page unavailable) reports 522 participants. Our copy does not address the STAMINA study or its 12-week design, 12-person enrollment, or intermittent DQ dosing (searched: STAMINA, senolytics, dasatinib, quercetin, pilot study). (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 40 · Cited by 34
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [27]Galvin JE, Roe CM, Powlishta KK, Coats MA, Muich SJ, Grant E, Miller JP, Storandt M, Morris JC (2005) The AD8: A brief informant interview to detect dementia. Neurology 65, 559– 564. 16116116
- [32]Fleiss JL (2011) Design and analysis of clinical experi- ments, John Wiley & Sons.
- Authors
- Ayers, E., & Verghese, J.
- Affiliations
- Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Verghese, Joe
- Venue
- Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2019-09-19
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- s1
- Pages
- S95-S103
- ISSN
- 1387-2877 (ISSN-L)
- 1875-8908
- PMC
- PMC7764990
- OpenAlex
- W2924101724
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 10.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Alzheimer s Disease (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Aging (R01AG044007, R56AG057548, R01AG036921)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
- Keywords
- motoric cognitive risk syndrome, gait disturbance
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Cognition, Cognition Disorders, Dementia, Disability Evaluation, Female, Gait, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Prognosis, Risk, Syndrome, Cohort Studies, Disease Progression
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
