Alterations of landing biomechanics from an inclined treadmill running-induced fatigue protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study examines the biomechanical effects of running-induced fatigue on the kinematic and kinetic changes of the lower limb during a countermovement jump (CMJ) via analyzing variations in joint biomechanics during landing. Methods A running-induced fatigue protocol was employed to explore changes in joint angle, moments, stiffness, and loading rate during the CMJ landing pre and post -fatigue. Paired-sample t-tests assessed changes in discrete parameters of joint stiffness, loading rates, and time-varying parameters were compared with one-dimensional statistical parametric mapping. Results Fatigue significantly reduced the range of motion (ROM) during landing, with significant differences in angles, specifically the dorsi-plantar flexion of right ankle, flexion-extension of left hip, rotation of left knee, and adduction-abduction of right knee (P<0.001). The first loading rate at touchdown decreased by 10%, and the time intervals between the first and second peak and the second and third peak reduced by 40% and 80%, respectively. Joint loading increased and the sagittal joint stiffness of left hip, right knee, and right ankle exhibited significant differences post-fatigue (P<0.001). Knee joint reduced the flexion angle (P<0.001) and the load of knee joint (P<0.001) during post-fatigue, with the role compensated by hip and ankle joints to achieve balance in the lower limb kinetic chain. Conclusions These findings provide pilot evidence that running fatigue may lead to changes in lower limb joint loadings and provide a scientific foundation for fatigue prediction and injury assessment.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".