MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W17647929

Relationship between Ground Reaction Force and Stability Level of the Lower Extremity in Runners

2013· article· en· W17647929 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kimitake Sato, Monique Butcher-Mokha

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of comparative medicine and veterinary science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround reaction forceMathematicsGeologyPhysicsKinematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Neuromuscular control is critical for providing protection from injury during dynamic activities. Running injuries have been associated with high ground reaction forces (GRF) which may be related to poor lower extremity stability in runners. Objective: To identify the relationship between peak active vertical GRF (VGRF) measured during running and Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT) scores in a group of recreational runners. Design and Setting: Subjects were assessed for lower extremity stability using the SEBT, and for peak active VGRF while running across a force plate in a laboratory setting. Scores were then correlated. Subjects: Seventeen healthy adults who ran at least 15 miles/wk were recruited. Measurements: The reaching length of the SEBT was measured from 3 directions (anterior, lateral, & posterior) of each foot, and the peak active VGRF was measured from the left foot while running across a force plate. Data were reduced using Pearson correlation coefficient, p < 0.05. Results: While the previously injured runners produced higher active VGRF (2.48 v 2.24 BW) and lower SEBT scores (45.09 v 51.83cm) as compared to the previously non-injured runners, there was no

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.293
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.033 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of comparative medicine and veterinary scienceSame topicLower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesFrench-language works237,207