A hierarchical cluster analysis to determine whether injured runners exhibit similar kinematic gait patterns
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have suggested that runners can be subgrouped based on homogeneous gait patterns; however, no previous study has assessed the presence of such subgroups in a population of individuals across a wide variety of injuries. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess whether distinct subgroups with homogeneous running patterns can be identified among a large group of injured and healthy runners and whether identified subgroups are associated with specific injury location. Three-dimensional kinematic data from 291 injured and healthy runners, representing both sexes and a wide range of ages (10-66 years), were clustered using hierarchical cluster analysis. Cluster analysis revealed five distinct subgroups from the data. Kinematic differences between the subgroups were compared using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Against our hypothesis, runners with the same injury types did not cluster together, but the distribution of different injuries within subgroups was similar across the entire sample. These results suggest that homogeneous gait patterns exist independent of injury location and that it is important to consider these underlying patterns when planning injury prevention or rehabilitation strategies.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 it