Changes in Medial/Lateral Hamstring Muscle Activation With Foot Rotation During Standard Lower Limb Exercise.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People with medial knee OA often walk with an externally rotated foot and have increased lateral hamstring (LH) and decreased medial hamstring (MH) activation. Altered foot rotation and muscle activation patterns may be attempts to decrease the knee adduction moment to reduce the pain that accompanies OA. Selective activation of the LH during exercise may strengthen the LH to decrease knee pain. Selectively recruiting LH may be possible by manipulating foot position during exercise. PURPOSE: To determine the relationship between foot rotation and MH/LH activation during lower limb exercise. METHODS: Hamstring EMG (n=10) was collected during three lower limb exercises (hamstring curl, hamstring bridge, one-leg deadlift). Five repeats of each exercise were performed with an internally rotated, externally rotated and straight foot position. EMG data was linear enveloped and normalized to the mean gait activation. Outcome measures were the average MH/LH activation ratios calculated using both the mean and peak EMG. RESULTS: External foot rotation decreased the MH/LH ratio, while internal rotation increased it (Table 1).Table 1: MH/LH Activation Ratio Across Foot Positions.CONCLUSIONS: Performing lower limb exercises with the foot in an externally rotated position can selectively activate the LH. Selective LH strengthening may help in correcting hamstring muscle imbalance thereby reducing knee pain and potentially delaying the onset and progression of knee OA.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".