Back

Walking in the Free World: Establishing Normative Trajectories for Ecological Assessment of Robust Gait Variability with Age

Tan, K. Z.; Friganovic, K.; Kim, Y. K.; Frautschi, A.; Gwerder, M.; Tan, K. Y.; Koh, V. J. W.; Malhotra, R.; Chan, A. W.-M.; Matchar, D. B.; Singh, N. B.

2026-03-06 geriatric medicine
10.64898/2026.03.06.26347806 medRxiv
Show abstract

Gait variability is a critical functional indicator of dynamic balance and neurocognitive decline in health. Its translation into clinical practice is, however, challenged by a lack of age-related normative trajectories and reference values under real-world ecological settings. Furthermore, the conventional metrics used to estimate gait variability (Coefficient of Variation, CV; Standard Deviation, SD) have a fundamental methodological flaw: the inherent sensitivity of conventional metrics to the statistical outliers and environmental noise in real-world walking. In this study, we mitigate this factor by applying a robust statistical framework to quantify gait variability. Analysing a large-scale cohort of community-dwelling older adults (n=2,193), we first demonstrate that freeliving gait data follows a heavy-tailed distribution, necessitating the use of robust estimators like the Robust Coefficient of Variation (RCVMAD) and Median Absolute Deviation (MAD). Leveraging these metrics, we established the normative trajectory and reference values of real-world gait variability across the ageing lifespan, revealing a distinct, age-dependent increase in spatio-temporal fluctuations, indicating a decline in rhythmicity and steadiness with age. We further demonstrated the clinical utility of these robust metrics: RCVMAD consistently yielded larger effect sizes than conventional CV in discriminating between fallers and non-fallers across all gait parameters. Furthermore, we illustrate the potential of long-term unsupervised monitoring to capture intrinsic variability during real-world walking. Validated for consistency and reliability, this robust framework provides the necessary ecological validity to transform gait variability into a standardised, rapid clinical metric for assessing functional decline at an early timepoint.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
The Journals of Gerontology: Series A
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.3%
2
Aging Cell
144 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
14.1%
3
The Journals of Gerontology, Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.3%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 11%
8.3%
5
GeroScience
97 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.3%
50% of probability mass above
6
npj Aging
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.8%
7
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 27%
3.5%
8
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.8%
9
Age and Ageing
27 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.7%
10
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 45%
2.6%
11
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.3%
12
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.0%
13
Aging
69 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.0%
14
Experimental Gerontology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
15
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
16
Journal of the American Medical Directors Association
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
17
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
18
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
19
BMC Geriatrics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
20
BMC Neurology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
21
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 62%
0.8%
22
Gait & Posture
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
23
Communications Psychology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
24
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
25
Experimental Brain Research
46 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
26
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
27
The Journal of Neuroscience
928 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.7%
28
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 32%
0.7%
29
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%