TABLE 3.
Comparison of the extracted parameter for short, medium, and long walking bouts (WB) between PD-FOF+ and PD-FOF−.
| WB | Parameter | PD-FOF+ | PD-FOF− | p-value | ES |
| Short | VSWB,P50 (m/s) | 0.70 [0.63, 0.71] | 0.71 [0.60, 0.76] | 0.533 | 0.04 |
| VSWB,P95 (m/s) | 1.10 [1.06, 1.19] | 1.07 [1.01, 1.20] | 0.529 | 0.10 | |
| GaitSWB,min (%) | 0.43 [0.39, 0.49] | 0.69 [0.36, 1.31] | 0.187 | −0.24 | |
| GaitSWB,avg (%) | 1.40 [1.19, 1.68] | 1.72 [1.30, 2.47] | 0.167 | −0.26 | |
| GaitSWB,max (%) | 2.65 [2.19, 2.81] | 3.15 [2.31, 4.50] | 0.095 | −0.23 | |
| Medium | VMWB,P50 (m/s) | 0.83 [0.79, 0.89] | 0.85 [0.78, 0.92] | 0.761 | 0.09 |
| VMWB,P95 (m/s) | 1.12 [1.08, 1.27] | 1.16 [1.06, 1.24] | 0.613 | 0.12 | |
| GaitMWB,min (%) | 0.00 [0.00, 0.07] | 0.00 [0.00, 0.13] | 0.271 | −0.19 | |
| GaitMWB,avg (%) | 0.51 [0.29, 0.67] | 0.62 [0.52, 0.92] | 0.110 | −0.25 | |
| GaitMWB,max (%) | 1.38 [0.84, 1.88] | 1.57 [1.24, 2.35] | 0.184 | −0.22 | |
| Long | VLWB,P50 (m/s) | 0.92 [0.89, 1.05] | 0.96 [0.89, 1.07] | 0.859 | 0.03 |
| VLWB,P95 (m/s) | 1.24 [1.12, 1.40] | 1.24 [1.11, 1.32] | 0.772 | 0.15 | |
| GaitLWB,min (%) | 0.00 [0.00, 0.00] | 0.00 [0.00, 0.05] | 0.279 | −0.16 | |
| GaitLWB,avg (%) | 1.08 [0.74, 1.24] | 1.87 [0.78, 2.70] | 0.431 | −0.28 | |
| GaitLWB,max (%) | 3.24 [2.26, 5.31] | 5.43 [3.94, 7.08] | 0.314 | −0.31 |
The p-value shows the significance of the coefficient of the IMU-based parameter in the logistic regression. *P < 0.05 was considered significant. The values of IMU-based parameters are shown by Median [IQR]. The effect size obtained by the r-value is ES.