Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Nov 15.
Published in final edited form as: J Biomech. 2021 Sep 7;128:110738. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110738

Table 2.

We performed a series of repeated measures ANOVA to investigate the effects of matching mediolateral foot placement to stationary visual targets (top two rows), to investigate the effects of matching foot placement to targets that shifted at the start of a step (third row), and to determine if gait speed changed when participants anticipated a shift in target that did not actually occur (last row).

Included
Trials		 Independent
Variable 1		 Independent
Variable 2		 Dependent
Variable(s)
Stationary Step Width Stepping leg (control vs. non-paretic vs. paretic) Prescribed step width (10 vs. 20 vs. 30 cm) Absolute mediolateral foot placement error
Stationary Step Width Group (control vs. PwCS) Prescribed step width (10 vs. 20 vs. 30 cm) Step width Walking speed
Shifting Step Width Stepping leg (control vs. non-paretic vs. paretic) Visual target shift (narrowing vs. widening) Absolute mediolateral foot placement error
Combined Group (control vs. PwCS) Anticipation of shift (20 cm Stationary trials vs. Shifting “catch” trials) Walking speed