Altered hip control during a standing knee‐lift test is associated with increased risk of knee injuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A few prospective studies have investigated hip and pelvic control as a risk factor for lower extremity (LE) injuries. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether deficits in hip and lumbopelvic control during standing knee-lift test are associated with increased risk of acute knee and LE injuries in youth team sports. At baseline, 258 basketball and floorball players (aged 12-21 years) participated in a standing knee-lift test using 3-dimensional motion analysis. Two trials per leg were recorded from each participant. Peak sagittal plane pelvic tilt and frontal plane pelvic drop/hike were measured. Both continuous and categorical variables were analyzed. New non-contact LE injuries, and match and training exposure, were recorded for 12 months. Seventy acute LE injuries were registered. Of these, 17 were knee injuries (eight ACL ruptures) and 35 ankle injuries. Risk factor analyses showed that increased contralateral pelvic hike was significantly associated with knee injury risk when using categorical variable (HR for high vs low group 4.07; 95% CI 1.32-12.6). Furthermore, significant association was found between high lateral pelvic hike angles and ACL injury risk in female players (HR for high vs low group 9.10; 95% CI 1.10-75.2). Poor combined sensitivity and specificity of the test was observed. In conclusion, increased contralateral pelvic hike is associated with non-contact knee injury risk among young team sport players and non-contact ACL injuries among female players. More research to determine the role of pelvic control as a risk factor for knee injuries is needed.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".