ArticleJournal of biomechanics2016
Segmental trunk and head dynamics during frontal plane tilt stimuli in healthy sitting adults.
Article in Journal of biomechanics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postural mechanisms in moderate-to-severe cerebral palsy.Journal of neurophysiology · 2021Article
- Specificity and variability of trunk kinematics on a mechanical horse.Human movement science · 2019Article
- Sensorimotor control of the trunk in sitting sway referencing.Journal of neurophysiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A more detailed understanding of trunk behavior during upright sitting is needed to create a foundation to address functional posture impairments. Therefore, we characterized the dynamics of the trunk and head during perturbed sitting. A three-link inverted pendulum model of head and trunk segments was used to analyze kinematics of eight healthy sitting adults. Magnetic sensors were placed at the head and two locations of the trunk (C7 and T7). Six surface tilt stimuli (two spontaneous sway tests [no surface stimulus; eyes open, EO/eyes closed, EC] and four tests with continuous pseudorandom surface tilts [2 peak-to peak amplitudes of 2° or 8°; EO/EC]) were applied in the frontal plane. We used frequency-response functions (FRFs) to analyze sway across ~0.045-3Hz and found systematic differences in sway dynamics across segments. Superior segments exhibited larger fluctuations in gain and phase values across frequencies. FRF gains in superior segments were attenuated compared to other segments only at low frequencies but were larger at the higher frequencies. We also tested the influence of stimulus amplitude and visual availability on FRFs. Across all segments, increasing stimulus amplitude and visual availability (EO) resulted in lower gains, however, these effects were most prominent in superior segments. These changes in gain were likely influenced by changes in sensory reliance across test conditions. In conclusion, these results provide a benchmark for future comparisons to segmental responses from individuals with impaired trunk control. We suggest that a frequency-based approach provides detail needed to characterize multi-segment dynamics related to sensorimotor control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.