MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164838159 · doi:10.1177/03635465211014854

Peak and Per-Step Tibial Bone Stress During Walking and Running in Female and Male Recreational Runners

2021· article· en· W3164838159 on OpenAlexaff
Stacey A. Meardon, Timothy R. Derrick, John D. Willson, Michael Baggaley, C. Ryan Steinbaker, Margaret Marshall, Richard W. Willy

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Sports Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsStress fracturesMedicineTreadmillGround reaction forceTibiaKinematicsBiomechanicsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationOrthodonticsPhysical therapySurgeryAnatomyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Athletes, especially female athletes, experience high rates of tibial bone stress injuries (BSIs). Knowledge of tibial loads during walking and running is needed to understand injury mechanisms and design safe running progression programs. Purpose: To examine tibial loads as a function of gait speed in male and female runners. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Kinematic and kinetic data were collected on 40 recreational runners (20 female, 20 male) during 4 instrumented gait speed conditions on a treadmill (walk, preferred run, slow run, fast run). Musculoskeletal modeling, using participant-specific magnetic resonance imaging and motion data, was used to estimate tibial stress. Peak tibial stress and stress-time impulse were analyzed using 2-factor multivariate analyses of variance (speed*sex) and post hoc comparisons (α = .05). Bone geometry and tibial forces and moments were examined. Results: Peak compression was influenced by speed ( P < .001); increasing speed generally increased tibial compression in both sexes. Women displayed greater increases in peak tension ( P = .001) and shear ( P < .001) than men when transitioning from walking to running. Further, women displayed greater peak tibial stress overall ( P < .001). Compressive and tensile stress-time impulse varied by speed ( P < .001) and sex ( P = .006); impulse was lower during running than walking and greater in women. A shear stress-time impulse interaction ( P < .001) indicated that women displayed greater impulse relative to men when changing from a walk to a run. Compared with men, women displayed smaller tibiae ( P < .001) and disproportionately lower tibial forces ( P≤ .001-.035). Conclusion: Peak tibial stress increased with gait speed, with a 2-fold increase in running relative to walking. Women displayed greater tibial stress than men and greater increases in stress when shifting from walking to running. Sex differences appear to be the result of smaller bone geometry in women and tibial forces that were not proportionately lower, given the womens’ smaller stature and lower mass relative to men. Clinical Relevance: These results may inform interventions to regulate running-related training loads and highlight a need to increase bone strength in women. Lower relative bone strength in women may contribute to a sex bias in tibial BSIs, and female runners may benefit from a slower progression when initiating a running program.

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 score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations39
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicLower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesFrench-language works237,207