Correlation Between Core Stability and Plantar Pressure Distribution During Double-Leg Stance, Single-Leg Stance, and Squat Positions in Healthy Male Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Core stability is a cornerstone of optimum athletic performance, and its reduction is a risk factor for athletic injuries. Evidence has shown that core impairments can alter lower-limb mechanics through the kinetic chains. Additionally, plantar pressure can be influenced by proximal conditions, such as core muscle fatigue. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the correlation between core endurance and plantar pressure distribution (PPD) during double-leg stance, single-leg stance, and single-leg squat positions in healthy male athletes. Methods: A total of 21 healthy male recreational athletes between 19 and 26 years of age volunteered to participate in this correlational study. The McGill core endurance test was used to measure the endurance of their core flexors, extensors, and lateral flexors. The participants’ PPD was evaluated using the Tekscan Mobile Mat pressure measurement system in three positions (double-leg stance, single-leg stance, and single-leg squat) for both the dominant and non-dominant feet. Results: There was a poor and insignificant correlation (p > 0.05) between the core flexors’, extensors’, and side flexors’ endurance and the peak and total PPD in all the tested positions for both the dominant and non-dominant feet. Conclusions: Core muscle endurance is neither a component that affects nor is affected by the PPD in this study population. Thus, the endurance of core flexors, extensors, and side flexors may not be considered in screening, examination, or intervention for the total and peak pressure during double-leg stance, single-leg stance, and single-leg squat positions for both the dominant and non-dominant feet in the study population. Further similar studies are warranted in various sports and during dynamic tasks to better understand the different dimensions of the studied relationship in athletes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".