Combining a Cognitive Concurrent Task with a Motor or Motor-Cognitive Task: Which Is Better to Differentiate Levels of Affectation in Parkinson’s Disease?

Table 2

Mixed ANOVAs and ANCOVAs comparing single and dual condition (intrasubject factor) for the fluency-pedaling and fluency-tracking dual tasks considering the disability groups (intersubject factor).

Tasks	Mixed ANOVAs	Mixed ANCOVAs
Fluency (with pedaling)	—	—
Fluency (with tracking)	Condition: single > dual	—
	[F (1, 30) = 7.94, ,  = 0.20, observed power = 0.78]
Pedaling (with fluency)	Disability group: mild > moderate	Disability group: mild > moderate
	[F(1, 29) = 6.86, ,  = 0.18, observed power = 0.71]	[F(1, 29) = 6.96, ,  = 0.19, observed power = 0.72]
	Condition: single > dual	—
	[F(1, 30) = 21.36, , = 0.42, observed power = 0.99]
Tracking (with fluency)	Disability group: mild > moderate
	[F(1, 29) = 5.19, ,  = 0.15, observed power = 0.59]
	Condition: single > dual	Condition: single > dual
	[F(1, 30) = 6.90, ,  = 0.19, observed power = 0.72]	[F(1, 29) = 4.19, ,  = 0.12, observed power = 0.50]
	Disability group x condition:	Disability group x condition:
	[F(1, 30) = 7.68, ,  = 0.20, observed power = 0.77]	[F(1, 29) = 8.02, ,  = 0.22, observed power = 0.78]
		Bonferroni:
		(a) Low > high in single condition [F(1, 29) = 8.90, ,  = 0.23, observed power = 0.82]
		(b) Single > dual in the mild group [F(1, 29) = 18.16, ,  = 0.38, observed power = 0.98]

MoCa total score as the covariate.