ABSTRACT
Long-term divergence exponents derived from nonlinear gait analysis (maximum Lyapunov exponent method) have recently been reinterpreted as measures of gait complexity rather than stability. This shift necessitates a comprehensive review of existing literature. This systematic review protocol aims to critically examine studies using long-term divergence exponents in gait analysis. The focus will be on reconciling previous findings with current understanding, evaluating methodological approaches, and synthesizing comparable results. We will search Web of Science (including MEDLINE) for peer-reviewed articles published between 2001 and 2024 that report long-term divergence exponents calculated using Rosenstein’s algorithm in human gait studies. Two independent reviewers will screen articles and extract data on study characteristics, methodological specifications, and result interpretations. Primary outcomes will include tracking how result interpretations have evolved over time and identifying potential reinterpretations based on current knowledge. Secondary outcomes will address methodological standardization. Data synthesis will primarily be narrative. Where possible, meta-analyses will be conducted for studies with comparable methods and objectives. Given the expected exploratory nature of many included studies, a narrative assessment of methodological quality will be performed instead of a formal risk of bias evaluation. This review will consolidate understanding of long-term divergence exponents as measures of gait complexity and automaticity, establish standardized computational methods, and inform future research and clinical applications in gait analysis.
Competing Interest Statement
The lead author (PT) has published extensively in the field of nonlinear gait analysis over the past 15 years and anticipates that several of his own papers may be included in the systematic review. To mitigate potential bias, two investigators who are early-career researchers without specialization in nonlinear gait analysis will independently conduct the study selection process. This approach aims to ensure greater neutrality in article inclusion. The author declares no other competing interests.
Funding Statement
The ACIDS (attractor complexity index document search) study is founded by the "fonds recherche et impulsion" (research and impulse fund) granted by the "commission scientifique du domaine santé" (scientific commission of the health faculty) at HES-SO, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland. The funder had no role in the development of this protocol, including the design of the study, the writing of the manuscript, or the decision to publish the protocol. The funder will have no role in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data in the subsequent systematic review.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
No data were collected or analyzed for this protocol. The completed systematic review will include a comprehensive data sharing plan. All data extracted from included studies during the review process will be made available.
