Investigation of knee control as a lower extremity injury risk factor: A prospective study in youth football
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This prospective study in youth football examined the relationship between frontal plane knee projection angle (FPKPA) during the single-leg squat and sustaining an acute lower extremity injury or acute non-contact lower extremity injury. Secondly, side-to-side asymmetry in FPKPA and sex as injury risk factors were explored. In addition, we investigated the influence of age, sex, and leg dominance on the FPKPA. A total of 558 youth football players (U11 to U14) participated in the single-leg squat test and prospective injury registration. FPKPA was not found as a risk factor for injuries at this age. There was no difference in the mean FPKPA between sexes. However, FPKPA was associated with age; oldest subjects displayed the smallest FPKPA. Among boys, the frontal plane knee control improved by age. Among girls, the relationship between age and FPKPA was not as clear, but the oldest girls displayed the smallest mean FPKPA in the study (12.2° ± 8.3°). The FPKPA was greater on the dominant kicking leg compared to the non-dominant support leg (P < .001 for boys, P = .001 for girls). However, side-to-side asymmetry in FPKPA was not associated with future injuries. In conclusion, frontal plane knee control in the single-leg squat was not associated with lower extremity injuries among young football players. As the single-leg squat to 90° knee flexion was too demanding for many subjects, easier single-leg squat test procedure or a different movement control test, such as a double-legged squat, could be more suitable for the young football players.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".