Greater squat stance width alters three-dimensional hip moment demands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Barbell squat exercise may be performed with different stance widths, which will influence lower limb kinematics and joint reaction forces. Consequently, three-dimensional hip moments may vary with stance width, influencing muscle loading, and the muscles trained when performing squat exercise. To examine how squat stance width affects hip moments, males (n = 11) and females (n = 13) performed barbell squats at narrow, medium, and wide stance widths. Motion capture and force platform data were used to calculate three-dimensional hip net joint moments (NJM) as indicators of the muscular moments required. Hip extensor NJM was greater for wide than medium (P < 0.001) and narrow (P < 0.001) stance squats. Hip adductor NJM was not different between squat stance widths (P = 0.414). Hip lateral rotator NJM was greater in medium versus narrow squats (P < 0.001), and in wide versus medium (P < 0.001) and narrow (P < 0.001) squats. Taken together, the rotational demands at the hip increase as stance width increases, due to higher hip extensor and lateral rotator NJM. In contrast hip adductor NJM is invariant. These data provide insight into the three-dimensional requirements that muscles must meet at the hip when squat exercise is performed at different stance widths.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".