The Relationship Between Postural Stability and Dancer’s Past and Future Lower-Limb Injuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an effort to address dance-related injuries, screening programs are typically employed to assess injury susceptibility. The aim of this study was to explore for potential links between postural stability and dancers' previous lower-limb injuries and susceptibility to future lower-limb injuries. Eighty-five contemporary dance students were recruited at a UK dance conservatoire. Information concerning previous injuries was collected by self-report survey. The participants completed two balance tasks, one static and one dynamic, performed on a RS Scan Footscan pressure pad to calculate postural sway. Injuries in the participant cohort were then tracked for a 10-month period to assess injury susceptibility. The participants exhibited significantly less postural sway when balancing on the left leg than their right, and the women exhibited less postural sway than the men. A one-way ANOVA revealed that participants who had experienced a lower-limb injury in the 12 months prior to testing exhibited more postural sway than participants who had not experienced a lower-limb injury, with some of the differences attaining significance (p <0.05). No significant links were found between either postural sway or previous injury and future injury susceptibility. The results suggest that assessments of postural stability via centre of pressure measurements are a reliable method for assessing dancers' balance ability. While reaffirming the importance of comprehensive, multidisciplinary screening programs, the results also highlight the necessity of developing a greater understanding of both dancers and the environments in which they dance and work to fully ascertain injury susceptibility.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".