Assessing the Temporal Organization of Walking Variability: A Systematic Review and Consensus Guidelines on Detrended Fluctuation Analysis
Human physiological signals are inherently rhythmic and have a hallmark feature in that even distant intrasignal measurements are related to each other. This relationship is termed long-range correlation and has been recognized as an indicator of the optimal state of the observed physiological systems, among which the locomotor system. Loss of long-range correlations has been found as a result of aging as well as disease, which can be evaluated with detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA). Recently, DFA and the scaling exponent α have been employed for understanding the degeneration of temporal regulation of human walking biorhythms in, for example, Parkinson disease (PD). However, heterogeneous evidence on scaling exponent α values reported in the literature across different population groups has put into question what constitutes a healthy physiological pattern. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the functional thresholds of scaling exponent α in young vs. older adults, as well as between patients with PD and age-matched asymptomatic controls. Aging and PD exhibited a negative effect size (i.e., led to decreased long-range correlations) of −0.20 and −0.53, respectively. Our meta-analysis based on 14 studies provides evidence that a mean scaling exponent α threshold of 0.86 [2 standard error (0.76, 0.96)] is able to optimally discriminate temporal organization of stride interval between young and old, whereas 0.82 (0.72, 0.92) differentiates patients with PD and age-matched asymptomatic controls. The optimal thresholds presented in this review together with the consensus guidelines for using DFA might allow a more sensitive and reliable application of this metric for understanding human walking physiology than has been achieved to date.
CITE THIS COLLECTION
REFERENCES
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.physa.2015.12.155
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.05033.x
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.physa.2005.03.019
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.physa.2007.04.120
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.physa.2008.04.023
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.neuroscience.2012.02.039
- https://doi.org//10.1038/srep00315
- https://doi.org//10.1097/NPT.0000000000000199
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.06.017
- https://doi.org//10.1103/PhysRevE.65.041107
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.02.047
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.12.002
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jmp.2006.07.004
- https://doi.org//10.1152/japplphysiol.90757.2008