Assessment & Research

Effects of a dual-task activity on gait parameters of people with and without intellectual disabilities.

Cabrera-Linares et al. (2024) · Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR 2024
★ The Verdict

Clients with ID lose smooth gait as soon as they walk and think at the same time—plan for it.

✓ Read this if BCBAs helping teens or adults with ID walk in group homes, jobs, or day programs.
✗ Skip if Clinicians serving only non-ambulatory clients or those without ID.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Researchers watched the adults walk across a lab. Half had intellectual disability (ID). Half were neurotypical.

Each person walked three ways: normal, while counting backwards, and while carrying a cup. Motion cameras tracked speed, step length, and step time.

The team compared how much the extra tasks hurt gait. They called this hurt the "dual-task cost."

02

What they found

The ID group got much worse on every gait measure. Their steps shortened, slowed, and became uneven.

Neurotypical walkers barely changed. The ID group paid a cost three times higher.

In plain words, walking while thinking or carrying is far harder for clients with ID.

03

How this fits with other research

Kayabınar et al. (2025) saw the same pattern in teens with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Dual-task cost was large there too. Together the papers show the problem spans many diagnoses.

Schneider et al. (2016) found wide multitasking deficits in youth with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. The new gait data narrow the focus to walking, proving the trouble hits basic mobility.

Chezan et al. (2019) reviewed motor-skill training for kids with ID. Balance drills helped, but locomotor gains were unclear. The 2024 findings hint that coaches must test walking under real-life loads, not just on a mat.

04

Why it matters

If your client has ID, treat "walking while talking" as a skill to teach, not assume. Start with short indoor paths, no items in hand, then add light loads or simple counts. Note any stumble or slow-down and back up a step. This keeps sessions safe and builds true community mobility.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Walk beside your client for 10 steps, then ask them to count backwards from five while still walking; mark any step that shortens or slows and use that spot to start gait training.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
quasi experimental
Sample size
119
Population
intellectual disability, neurotypical
Finding
negative
Magnitude
medium

03Original abstract

BACKGROUND: The main objective of this study was to evaluate gait parameters in people with intellectual disability (ID) and without intellectual disability (WID) in two different walking conditions [single task vs. dual task (DT)]. A secondary aim was to evaluate the dual-task cost (DTC) that the DT causes in each group. METHODS: A total of 119 participants joined in this study: 56 ID (30 men) and 63 WID (30 men). The OptoGait system was used to assess gait. In addition, Witty photocells were added to assess gait under the DT condition. RESULTS: Single support time was lower for participants with ID (P < 0.01), while double support time was higher (P < 0.05). All coefficients of variation for gait parameters were higher in participants with ID. Additionally, changes in gait were observed in both groups during the DT condition compared with the single-task condition. These changes were larger for participants with ID in step length, double support time and gait speed (P < 0.001), resulting in a higher DTC in these variables in the ID group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Both groups reduced gait performance in the DT condition. However, greater gait variability occurred in the ID group. In addition, DTC was higher for the ID group in all variables analysed. Therefore, people with ID show worse gait performance during a DT than people WID.

Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2024 · doi:10.1111/jir.13134