ライフサイエンスコーパス: dual task

1 r task in persons with isolated BV (ie, when dual-tasking).

2 ody strengthening with cognitive challenges (dual-tasking).

3 s eliminated by a verbal, but not a spatial, dual task.

4 ns were preferred walking speed and semantic dual task.

5 y impaired relative to young subjects on the dual-task.

6 frontal regions that were active only in the dual-task.

7 PD) patients have difficulty in performing a dual-task.

8 erent levels of environmental complexity and dual-task.

9 r environmental conditions during single and dual-task.

10 mispace when engaged with resource-consuming dual tasks.

11 ach for updating, inhibition, switching, and dual-tasking.

12 uggested that the cerebellum is important in dual-tasking.

13 2, 95% CI 0.58-0.88; p=0.002) and the simple dual task (0.79; 0.62-0.99; p=0.045).

14 both previous motor adaptation data and our dual-task adaptation data: a fast process that contains

15 In VI subjects, the dual task affected "online corrections," suggesting that

16 after maximum velocity," indicating that the dual task affects both the planning of the movement and

17 visual and somatosensory) during single and dual tasks after training and 6 weeks follow-up.

18 ve of performance gains in the corresponding dual task along with complete elimination of modality-sp

19 g underlying smoker heterogeneity with this 'dual (task and abstinence) stressor' approach revealed d

20 ed significant deficits in manual dexterity, dual-tasking and motion perception, and a striking degra

21 as acquisition (single task), automaticity (dual task) and retention of single- and dual-task perfor

22 pection time was combined with digit recall (dual-task) and in letter fluency.

23 Here, we used a unique dual-task approach to compare hippocampal-prefrontal syn

24 We first used a dual-task approach to identify SWM-specific patterns of

25 However, although multitasking and dual-tasking are widely present in everyday activities,

26 g exercise would be diminished by prolonged 'dual tasking' as a consequence of pCL.

27 resynaptic proteins that may accomplish this dual task at conventional synapses by interacting with t

28 In this work, the dual-task BERTweet model was developed to identify unrep

29 in prefrontal cortex that were active in the dual-task, but not in the component tasks.

30 Compromised dual-tasking can hinder mobility, increase fall risk, an

31 e already utilized for single tasks and, for dual tasks, cannot augment as necessary in order to inte

32 to perform daily functional activities with dual tasking.Clinical Trial Registration NCT05919251.

33 As dual-task complexity increased, cognitive and motor perf

34 By including a multimodal dual-task component, the task is demanding to the human

35 Dual-task composed of gait or stepping tasks combined wi

36 ingle-task condition (while seated) and in a dual-task condition (combined with a static and a dynami

37 In the most complex dual-task condition (i.e. 2-back + force tracking), bila

38 The dual-task condition produced a significant deterioration

39 g speed when walking (ie, during the dynamic dual-task condition).

40 tasks were performed in the single-task and dual-task condition.

41 worse gait performance, particularly during dual task conditions (ie, walking while performing an ad

42 n standing postural sway-particularly during dual task conditions- appears to be a better predictor o

43 arning auditorily presented word lists under dual task conditions.

44 ual-spatial decision task) under single- and dual-task conditions (cognitive-motor interference) in a

45 Dual-task conditions did not reduce accuracy but reduced

46 postural sway complexity in both single and dual-task conditions had higher future fall rate (incide

47 and cognitive performance under single- and dual-task conditions in advanced Parkinson's disease pat

48 Under relatively simple dual-task conditions there were no differences in cognit

49 as recorded under single-task and 3 separate dual-task conditions using an electronic walkway.

50 ced-maintenance) tests under single-task and dual-task conditions while on and off DBS.

51 in cognitive and motor function under modest dual-task conditions with bilateral but not with unilate

52 Under dual-task conditions, force tracking was significantly b

53 When learning was implicit under dual-task conditions, learning-related changes were obse

54 During dual-task conditions, patients performed the n-back and

55 Under dual-task conditions, people with PD made less frequent

56 Under dual-task conditions, the subjects performed contrast di

57 ecutive function deficits in single-task and dual-task conditions, while this could only be elicited

58 otor (force tracking) task under single- and dual-task conditions.

59 egions decreased equally for single-task and dual-task conditions.

60 n time (SRT) task under both single-task and dual-task conditions.

61 th obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) under dual-task conditions.

62 e with PD for single-task conditions but not dual-task conditions.

63 Dual task cost (DTC, %) was calculated to assess DT inte

64 ncussion-related symptoms, exhibited greater dual task cost (ie, percentage increase) to stride time

65 First, while young adults showed classical dual-task cost in the early motor learning phase dominat

66 to those who did not, also exhibited greater dual task costs to this metric.

67 Relationships between reported trauma and dual task costs were independent of age, body mass index

68 Children experienced dual-task costs in the 6- and 4-channel conditions of th

69 condary task contributes to the magnitude of dual-task costs while multitasking during degraded speec

70 th complete elimination of modality-specific dual-task costs.

71 echanisms underlying the problems that cause dual-task deficits in older adults with balance impairme

72 0-back, low load and 2-back, high load) in a dual-task design.

73 nts in step time variability for the complex dual task did not differ between groups (0.81, 0.60-1.09

74 ving was assessed under both single-task and dual-task (distracted) conditions.

75 and gait evaluations in usual-walk (UW) and dual-task (DT) conditions.

76 Dual-task (DT) tests may have ecological validity to ass

77 ng (UW) and walking by avoiding an obstacle (Dual-Task, DT).

78 on was assessed by contrasting the cognitive dual-task effect with the motor dual-task effect.

79 he cognitive dual-task effect with the motor dual-task effect.

80 We evaluated motor and cognitive dual-task effects and task prioritization in 15 people w

81 ndings underscore the importance of studying dual-task effects on gait patterns to enhance safety in

82 evaluated by calculating motor and cognitive dual-task effects, whereas task prioritization was asses

83 r, it is unknown whether CBF obtained during dual task execution correlates with performance, or if a

84 impairment who participated in our previous dual-task experiment and completed all routine neuropsyc

85 , change in stride length between normal and dual-task gait (ie, dual-task interference) was more pro

86 cues after training during both single- and dual-task gait and these effects were retained.

87 Dual-task gait cost was defined as the percentage change

88 r adjusting by baseline cognition except for dual-task gait cost when dichotomized.

89 3.41; 95% CI, 0.99-11.71; P = .05)while high dual-task gait cost while counting backward (HR, 3.79; 9

90 and single- and dual-task gait velocity and dual-task gait costs were the independent variables.

91 Dual-task gait is associated with progression to dementi

92 d factor score effect size = 0.41, p = .001; dual-task gait speed effect size = 0.43, p = .002).

93 A dual-task gait test evaluating the cognitive-motor inter

94 To determine whether a dual-task gait test is associated with incident dementia

95 Dual-task gait testing is easy to administer and may be

96 as the percentage change between single- and dual-task gait velocities: ([single-task gait velocity -

97 as the main outcome measure, and single- and dual-task gait velocity and dual-task gait costs were th

98 it velocities: ([single-task gait velocity - dual-task gait velocity]/ single-task gait velocity) x 1

99 jects who performed relatively poorly on the dual-task; however, for young subjects who performed rel

100 Environment and dual-task impacted on saccadic frequency especially for

101 vement in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis with dual-task impairment associating with dorsolateral prefr

102 ions additionally activated while performing dual-task in PD patients.

103 This is a dual-task in which subjects perform a memory task while

104 n aimed to contrast the level and quality of dual-task interactions resulting from the combined perfo

105 main would be revealed as most vulnerable to dual-task interactions.

106 setting, performance-enhancing instruction, dual task interference, and feedback.

107 that may underlie previously observed visual dual-task interference effects with stance postural cont

108 individuals with PD who freeze, and whether dual-task interference is associated with structural con

109 Further, in people with PD who freeze, dual-task interference was correlated with asymmetry of

110 ength between normal and dual-task gait (ie, dual-task interference) was more pronounced in people wi

111 We measured whether dual-task interference, defined as the reduction in gait

112 ence and the role of task representations in dual-task interference.

113 Dual-task involved a simultaneous execution of a sensor-

114 advantages to visual tracking attention when dual tasking is required, extending the evidence that bi

115 was correlated with striatal activity after dual-task learning conditions.

116 s (BA 39)], inhibition (left IFG BA 46), and dual-tasking [left postcentral gyrus (BA 40)].

117 RI), here we present a neural basis for such dual-task limitations, e.g. the inability of the posteri

118 raging more effortful retrieval and reducing dual-task load.

119 eing directed toward the oddball task during dual-task locomotion.

120 om single-task to dual-tasks when using the 'dual-task loss' analysis.

121 ed walking pace, and at a faster pace, using dual-task methodology.

122 Using dual-task methods, we next examined the influence of att

123 We report a dual-tasked methylation that is based on cooperative pal

124 these salient and practical features of our dual-tasked methylation toolbox will be welcomed by acad

125 We developed a dual-task noise classification technique that enables id

126 of the bacteriophage phi6 by performing the dual tasks of replication and transcription of the doubl

127 Here, we examined effects of a dual task on gait cycle variability in healthy young adu

128 is study aimed to investigate the effects of dual tasks on gait performance and examine the test-rete

129 y non-allergic controls (n = 42) performed a dual-task paradigm and a verbal learning and memory test

130 This is achieved using a dual-task paradigm and tasks that manipulate stimulus pr

131 Using a dual-task paradigm combined with eye-tracking in a visua

132 al monitoring task was quantified during the dual-task paradigm in each condition of the primary task

133 fic to movement coordination, we introduce a dual-task paradigm in which a reach and a saccade are cu

134 This was investigated further using a dual-task paradigm in which the interference between two

135 Children (8 to 12 years old) completed a dual-task paradigm including a sentence recognition (pri

136 training benefits, assessed using a standard dual-task paradigm, are associated with variability in b

137 Using an audiovisual dual-task paradigm, we show that pupil size increases wi

138 s and 25 healthy comparison subjects using a dual-task paradigm, with subjects simultaneously engaged

139 ome measures performed were repeated using a dual-task paradigm.

140 mance seen when moving from a single-task to dual-task paradigm.

141 Dual-task paradigms have commonly been used to investiga

142 nal MRI, we imaged brain function during two dual-task paradigms, each with a common auditory compone

143 In each of the two dual-task paradigms, the results showed that the activat

144 During the dual-task, participants performed the n-back and force-t

145 ng from adulthood into senescence diminishes dual task performance and CBF.

146 asks, that all of the areas activated during dual task performance were also activated during the com

147 ity (dual task) and retention of single- and dual-task performance (follow-up).

148 Dual-task performance activated frontal-lobe areas to a

149 nt 1 determined whether for BIOA, single vs. dual-task performance conditions led to similar effects

150 uced general attentional capacity vs. a true dual-task performance deficit and inability to allocate

151 that neither older adult group showed a true dual-task performance deficit, but rather BIOA showed a

152 dy was to develop an objective tool based on dual-task performance for screening early-stage Alzheime

153 nterior lobe were additionally activated for dual-task performance in healthy controls and for motor

154 ermine if the effect of bilateral STN DBS on dual-task performance in isolated patients with dystonia

155 simultaneous tasks, in contrast to preserved dual-task performance in the normal elderly group.

156 In all conditions, children's dual-task performance on the visual monitoring task was

157 Results indicated that dual-task performance reduction did not exceed that of t

158 D amplifies the decrement in cognitive-motor dual-task performance seen when moving from a single-tas

159 After extensive behavioral training, dual-task performance showed comparatively less activity

160 Dual-task performance significantly correlated with frac

161 The diminishing cost of dual-task performance was used as an index for automatic

162 ntional resources between alternative goals (dual-task performance) could by themselves activate thes

163 ere are any areas additionally activated for dual-task performance, and compared the neural activity

164 inical measures of executive function and in dual-task performance, but not measures that tap the abi

165 e the executive processes involved in novice dual-task performance.

166 hippocampal-prefrontal synchrony seen during dual-task performance.

167 nse selection bottleneck that limits speeded dual-task performance.

168 These results indicate that dual task postural control is reliant on CBF, yet the na

169 To simulate real-life dual-task postural control conditions, the second set of

170 l subjects were administered an experimental dual-task procedure that combined a visual inspection ti

171 nd reinforce earlier evidence for a specific dual-task processing deficit in Alzheimer's disease.

172 All participants completed the 2BALANCE dual-task protocol, comprising a static and a dynamic mo

173 nto a pursuit target, and tested single- and dual-task pursuit in mTBI patients and healthy controls.

174 ates tracking of a moving object, in a novel dual-task pursuit protocol.

175 ally when standing and performing cognitive "dual tasks," requires effective regulation of cerebral b

176 e using the equation: 100*(single task score-dual task score)/single-task score.

177 0.58; b = -2.46; 95% CI, -3.56 to -1.36) and dual-task (SDLP ES, 0.27; b = 1.75; 95% CI, 0.21 to 3.28

178 ific activity patterns that were seen during dual-task sessions within the hippocampal-prefrontal cir

179 ural interference in young adults (n=9) in a dual-task setting.

180 nal behavioural and subjective measures in a dual-task setting.

181 otor task (force tracking) under single- and dual-task settings.

182 If true, dual-tasking should predominantly impair reward processi

183 may contribute to reduce performance in the dual-task situations for the BIOA.

184 Instead, dual-tasking slowed down participants' walking, thereby

185 st (SPPB) test and assessments of single and dual-task standing postural control.

186 in the lowest quintile of complexity during dual-task standing suffered 48% more falls during the fo

187 t specific to cued gait and were observed in dual-task step length, and walking speed however was mor

188 For dual tasks, subjects performed a visual letter-counting

189 beginning with a single letter), and complex dual task switching with phonemic verbal fluency (walkin

190 elucidate the diagnostic availability of the dual-task system and the MMSE on this dataset, we conduc

191 Our new AI-driven dual-task system has a high ability to predict neurocogn

192 We previously developed a novel dual-task system with high accuracy for differentiating

193 A retention test (12 trials) and a transfer dual-task test (12 trials) were conducted on the second

194 sonance imaging (fMRI) with performance of a dual task that probed attentional distraction by alcohol

195 instability through CMP acts as a cognitive dual-task that dampens the sensitivity of the sensorimot

196 ry outcomes were timed up-and-go test (TUG), dual-task TUG (DT-TUG), motor section of the Movement Di

197 natural and more challenging conditions (eg, dual-tasking, turning, and daily living) enhanced sensit

198 (scenes > faces > abstract patterns) using a dual-task verbal interference behavioural paradigm.

199 tion, we propose a neural network structure, dual-task vision transformer (DTViT), for the automated

200 underwent a mobility assessment (usual-walk, dual-task walk, Timed Up and Go) and MRI scan.

201 Remote, smartphone-based assessments of dual task walking may be utilized to capture meaningful

202 .g., usual-walking) and complex tasks (i.e., dual task walking, turns, transitions) and cortical thic

203 e performing sustained, physically demanding dual-task walking and (2) test hypotheses about how the

204 stability (Margin of Stability during normal/dual-task walking), (3) mobility (the Timed Up and Go te

205 as the reduction in gait performance during dual-task walking, is more pronounced in individuals wit

206 ges with gait and cognitive function, making dual-task walking, such as visual searching or obstacle

207 ributed to the reduced P300 amplitude during dual-task walking.

208 2 without freezing of gait during normal and dual-task walking.

209 ubjects who performed relatively well in the dual-task, we found no prefrontal regions that were acti

210 Two dual tasks were used to evaluate automaticity.

211 14, p=0.019) when moving from single-task to dual-tasks when using the 'dual-task loss' analysis.

212 condition), and double-support phase (12% in dual-task) when compared to baseline.

213 nitive reserve apparent only when faced with dual tasks, which had recovered to baseline by four days

214 in three conditions: normal walking, simple dual task with phonemic verbal fluency (walking while na

215 ks, either independently, or in combination (dual-task), with and without perceptual noise.

216 to walk at different speeds under single and dual tasking, with a wearable device placed on the lower