MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1870348972 · doi:10.1080/19424280.2015.1130754

Forefoot bending stiffness, running economy and kinematics during overground running

2016· article· en· W1870348972 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFootwear Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRunning economyKinematicsAnkleForefootStiffnessSagittal planePhysical medicine and rehabilitationBiomechanicsBending stiffnessStructural engineeringMedicineOrthodonticsPhysical therapyMathematicsEngineeringPhysicsSurgeryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research has shown that altering forefoot (FF) bending stiffness can enhance running economy; however, the mechanism behind the changes in running economy remains unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between forefoot bending stiffness, running economy, and lower limb kinematics during overground running. Eighteen aerobically fit recreational male athletes performed overground running using a portable metabolic analysis system to measure oxygen consumption in two footwear conditions with different forefoot bending stiffness. Sagittal plane kinematic data of the metatarsophalangeal, ankle, and knee joints were recorded using a high-speed camera. On average, there was no difference in running economy when running in the Stiff shoe (O2 = 38.1 ± 5.4 mL/kg/min) compared to the Control shoe (O2 = 37.7 ± 5.8 mL/kg/min, p = 0.11). On an individual basis, 10 athletes (Responders) improved their running economy with increased FF bending stiffness (∆O2 = −2.9%), while eight athletes (Non-Responders) worsened or did not improve their running economy in a stiff shoe (∆O2 = +1.0%). In stiff footwear, Responders experienced kinematic changes at the ankle joint (decreased angular velocity) that likely resulted in decreased energy requirement for muscular contractions due to a presumed shift on their individual force–velocity relationship. The lack of improvement in running economy by the Non-Responders may be attributed to a presumed lack of a shift in the force–velocity relationship of the calf musculature. Instead, Non-Responders experienced kinematic changes (increased ankle plantarflexion during push phase with stiff footwear) that likely hindered their moment-generating capability potentially due to a shift on their individual force–length relationship. These findings represent important progress towards explaining inter-individual changes in running economy with different footwear bending stiffness.

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.191 · 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