ライフサイエンスコーパス: dual task

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

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

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

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

5 erent levels of environmental complexity and dual-task.

6 r environmental conditions during single and dual-task.

7 mispace when engaged with resource-consuming dual tasks.

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

9 2, 95% CI 0.58-0.88; p=0.002) and the simple dual task (0.79; 0.62-0.99; p=0.045).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

24 The dual-task condition produced a significant deterioration

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

26 arning auditorily presented word lists under dual task conditions.

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

28 Dual-task conditions did not reduce accuracy but reduced

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

53 3.41; 95% CI, 0.99-11.71; P = .05)while high dual-task gait cost while counting backward (HR, 3.79; 9

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

55 Dual-task gait is associated with progression to dementi

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

90 Dual-task paradigms have commonly been used to investiga

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

107 Dual-task performance significantly correlated with frac

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

129 2 without freezing of gait during normal and dual-task walking.

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

131 Two dual tasks were used to evaluate automaticity.

132 14, p=0.019) when moving from single-task to dual-tasks when using the 'dual-task loss' analysis.

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