Table 3.

GRADE evidence profile

Certainty assessment							No. of patients		Effect	Certainty
No. of studies	Study design	Risk of bias	Inconsistency	Indirectness	Imprecision	Other considerations	Motor–cognitive	Control	Absolute (95% CI)
Dual-task gait speed (m/s)
8	Randomised trials	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	None	223	223	MD 0.12 higher (0.08 higher to 0.17 higher)	⨁⨁⨁⨁ High
Dual-task cadence (steps/min)
5	Randomised trials	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	None	142	142	MD 2.91 higher (0.08 higher to 5.73 higher)	⨁⨁⨁⨁ High
Dual-task stride length (cm)
6	Randomised trials	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	None	206	208	MD 10.12 higher (4.86 higher to 15.38 higher)	⨁⨁⨁⨁ High
Dual-task stride length SD
2	Randomised trials	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	None	103	109	MD 0.38 lower (1.29 lower to 0.53 higher)	⨁⨁⨁⨁ High
Dual-task stride time SD
2	Randomised trials	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	None	103	109	MD 0.01 lower (0.02 lower to 0.01 higher)	⨁⨁⨁⨁ High
Dual-task double support (%)
3	Randomised trials	Not serious	Seriousa	Not serious	Not serious	None	107	113	MD 1.63 lower (3.76 lower to 0.49 higher)	⨁⨁⨁◯ Moderate
Dual-task cost on gait speed (%)
2	Randomised trials	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	None	50	48	MD 8.75 lower (14.57 lower to 2.92 lower)	⨁⨁⨁⨁ High
Dual-task reaction time (ms)
2	Randomised trials	Not serious	Seriousb	Not serious	Seriousc	None	69	78	MD 24.91 higher (43.02 lower to 92.84 higher)	⨁⨁◯◯ Low
Timed Up and Go Cognitive (sec)
3	Randomised trials	Seriousd	Seriousb	Not serious	Not serious	None	77	64	MD 1.81 lower (4.38 lower to 0.75 higher)	⨁⨁◯◯ Low

CI confidence interval, MD mean difference

Explanations

^aModerate heterogeneity (48%). Wide variance of point estimates

^bWide variance of point estimates across studies

^cWide confidence interval around the estimate of the effect

^dTwo of three studies had high overall risk of bias