MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095547618 · doi:10.7717/peerj.10239

Influences of heel height on human postural stability and functional mobility between inexperienced and experienced high heel shoe wearers

2020· article· en· W3095547618 on OpenAlexaff
Yiyang Chen, Jing Xian Li, Lin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPosturographyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnkleHeelForce platformBarefootBalance (ability)Repeated measures designMedicinePhysical therapyCenter of pressure (fluid mechanics)GaitPsychologyMathematicsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: High heel shoes (HHS) can affect human postural control because elevated heel height (HH) may result in plantar flexed foot and limit ankle joint range of motion during walking. Effects of HH and HHS wearing experience on postural stability during self-initiated and externally triggered perturbations are less examined in the literature. Hence, the objective of the present study is to investigate the influences of HH on human postural stability during dynamic perturbations, perceived stability, and functional mobility between inexperienced and experienced HHS wearers. METHODS: A total of 41 female participants were recruited (21 inexperienced HHS wearers and 20 experienced HHS wearers). Sensory organization test (SOT), motor control test (MCT), and limits of stability (LOS) were conducted to measure participant's postural stability by using computerized dynamic posturography. Functional reach test and timed up and go test were performed to measure functional mobility. The participants' self-perceived stability was assessed by visual analog scale. Four pairs of shoes with different HH (i.e., 0.8, 3.9, 7.0, and 10.1 cm) were applied to participants randomly. Repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted to detect the effects of HH and HHS wearing experience on each variable. RESULTS: During self-initiated perturbations, equilibrium score remarkably decreased when wearing 10.1 cm compared with flat shoes and 3.9 cm HHS. The contribution of vision to postural stability was larger in 10.1 cm HHS than in flat shoes. The use of ankle strategy worsened when HH increased to 7 cm. Similarly, the directional control of the center of gravity (COG) decreased for 7 cm HHS in LOS. Experienced wearers showed significantly higher percentage of ankle strategy and COG directional control than novices. Under externally triggered perturbations, postural stability was substantially decreased when HH reached 3.9 cm in MCT. No significant difference was found in experienced wearers compared with novices in MCT. Experienced wearers exhibited considerably better functional mobility and perceived stability with increased HH. CONCLUSIONS: The use of HHS may worsen dynamic postural control and functional mobility when HH increases to 3.9 cm. Although experienced HHS wearers exhibit higher proportion of ankle strategy and COG directional control, the experience may not influence overall human postural control. Sensory organization ability, ankle strategy and COG directional control might provide useful information in developing a safety system and prevent HHS wearers from falling.

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)0.000
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 score0.776
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicLower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesFrench-language works237,207