MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998312401 · doi:10.4018/ijeach.2020010103

The Effect of Breathing Pattern and Heel Strike Pattern on Peak Ground Reaction Force at Initial Contact During Walking

2019· article· en· W2998312401 on OpenAlexaff
Paolo Sanzo, Cassandra Felice, Carlos Zerpa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Extreme Automation and Connectivity in Healthcare · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround reaction forceHeelBreathingExhalationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationFoot (prosody)BiomechanicsSimulationMedicineComputer sciencePhysicsAnesthesiaAnatomyKinematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been proposed that during running, the greatest force occurs when the foot strikes the ground and simultaneously exhalation occurs at initial heel contact. As a result, breathing retraining has been used as a method to prevent lower extremity overuse injuries by modifying an individual's breathing pattern and consequently, reducing ground reaction forces. There is, however, little research exploring this link during walking. This study explored the interaction effect between the phase of respiration and foot strike pattern on measures of ground reaction forces while walking. The study also examined the correlation between the phase of respiration and peak forces. The research findings did not support the concept of breathing synchronization with higher ground reaction forces when exhalation occurred at heel strike during walking. The biomechanics of walking are very different than running and, therefore, the utility of breathing retraining may not be supported as has been proposed for running.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Extreme Automation and Connectivity in HealthcareSame topicLower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesFrench-language works237,207