Skip to main content
Fig. 4 | Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

Fig. 4

From: Dealing with the heterogeneous presentations of freezing of gait: how reliable are the freezing index and heart rate for freezing detection?

Fig. 4

Results of the post-hoc analyses of the linear mixed-model analysis of the first model comparing the FI (A–C) (model 1.a), and heart rate (D–F) (model 1.b) for the differences between preFOG and baseline (light orange), and FOG and baseline (dark orange). The point ranges indicate the estimated differences with standard errors of the post-hoc analyses for each FOG type (first column), FOG trigger (second column), and DT condition (third column), but the symbols are only filled when significant interaction effects were found for this factor by time. This means that the panels with the hollow symbols followed the main effects of Table 2. Results of the post-hoc analysis that were significant after p-value correction are indicated with an asterisk (*, < 0.05; **, < 0.005). Figures were created with the ggplot2 package in Rstudio. (FI Freezing Index; FOG Freezing of Gait; noDT no dual-task; cDT cognitive dual-task; mDT motor dual-task)

Back to article page