Study on three‐dimensional kinematics and electromyography of ACL deficient knee participants wearing a functional knee brace during running
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This investigation examined the muscular activity and 3D knee joint kinematic changes of anterior cruciate ligament-deficient (ACLD) participants in the involved leg under bracing condition during running. Different adaptation strategies have been found between patients who can cope with the injury and patients who cannot. One of the expected changes can be the muscle activation characteristic of the injured knee during strenuous activity with and without a functional knee brace. Three-dimensional kinematic and electromyographical (EMG) data were collected from 11 participants for 10 consecutive gait cycles during running on a treadmill under both braced and unbraced conditions. Participants were administered the "Knee Outcome Survey Activities of Daily Living Scale" to distinguish functional and non-functional candidates. No significant differences on 3D kinematics and EMG data were noted between functional and non-functional participants, thus data analysis focused on comparisons of bracing conditions for one combined group. Bracing significantly reduced total range of motion in the frontal and transverse planes (P<0.05). Muscle activity at heel-strike showed a consistent trend to increase for the hamstrings and decrease for the quadriceps under the braced condition when compared to the unbraced condition. Our findings indicate that bracing the ACLD knee alters the kinematics of the injured leg while running. Tendencies toward reductions in quadriceps and increases in hamstrings activity at heel-strike indicate that bracing might have resulted in added stability of the injured knee. The adaptations to bracing found in this preliminary study further support the potential mechanical and proprioceptive contributions of the functional knee brace to protect the ACLD knee.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".