Journal Article in PLOS ONE:
Causal inference is inherently ambiguous since we cannot observe multiple realizations of the same person with different characteristics. Causal models must be evaluated through indirect means and reasoning.
Aim: The main objectives in conducting this study were to (1) propose a comprehensive model for quantifying the causes and consequences of walking impairments and (2) demonstrate the potential utility of the model for supporting clinical care and addressing basic scientific questions related to walking.
Method: This paper introduced a model consisting of 10 nodes and 23 primary causal paths and demonstrated the model’s utility using a large sample of gait data.
Results: The model was plausible, captured some well-known cause-effect relationships, provided new insights into others, and generated novel hypotheses requiring further testing through simulation or experiment.
Interpretation: This model is a proposal that is meant to be critically evaluated, validated or refuted, altered, and improved over time. Such improvements might include the introduction of new nodes, variables, and paths.