Impact of Fatigue on Spine Dynamic Stability and Gait Patterns in Runners with Moderate Flatfoot Versus Normal Arch
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Running is a widely practiced physical activity but carries a high risk of injury, with foot structure, particularly the medial arch, playing a vital role in biomechanical performance and injury prevention. As the core of foot support, the arch is essential for absorbing impact, transmitting force, and maintaining dynamic stability. This study aims to compare the dynamic stability of runners with moderate flatfoot and those with normal arches in the initial, steady, and fatigue stages in order to elucidate how fatigue differently affects their dynamic postural control. Methods: Twelve male runners were recruited. Using inertial measurement units (IMUs) and a Zebris treadmill system, data on Maximum Lyapunov Exponent(MLE) and plantar center of pressure (COP) trajectories were collected during the initial, steady-state, and fatigued phases. Results: In the fatigue phase, runners with flatfoot showed an increase of 0.05 s−1 in short-term MLE compared to those with normal arches (p < 0.05), indicating significantly lower stability under fatigue. Conclusions: The deterioration of lower-limb dynamic stability in flatfoot runners is dependent on fatigue. Specifically, their overall lower dynamic stability stems primarily from a marked increase in MLE when entering the fatigued phase. Concurrently, fatigue induces alterations in COP trajectory and temporal gait parameters in flatfoot runners; they signify reduced efficiency in gait control.
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.
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 it