ArticleJournal of sports science & medicine2017
Assessment of Three-Dimensional Trunk Kinematics and Muscle Activation during Cycling with Independent Cranks.
Article in Journal of sports science & medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Main elements of current spine biomechanics research: model, installation and test data.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Effect of cycling exercise on lumbopelvic control performance in elite female cyclists.Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions · 2021Article
- Validation of a 3D Camera System for Cycling Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Exercise Biomechanics and Physiology.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Sport Biomechanics Applications Using Inertial, Force, and EMG Sensors: A Literature Overview.Applied bionics and biomechanics · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Independent cranks (IC) are recently introduced bicycle cranks that are decoupled; therefore allowing each leg to pedal independent of the other. Despite this introduction, limited research has been conducted assessing biomechanical changes when cycling with IC. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare trunk kinematics and surface electromyography (sEMG) during IC and normal crank (NC) cycling during a graded exercise test to volitional fatigue. Ten healthy, physically active men performed two tests (IC and NC) on a cycling ergometer on separate days. 3D motion capture data of the trunk and pelvis and sEMG of the latissimus dorsi, tibialis anterior, gastrocnemius lateral head, rectus femoris, vastus lateralis and the biceps femoris were collected bilaterally. The first 30 seconds (beginning) and the last 30 seconds (end) of each trial were analyzed with respect to external load (beginning vs end), crank type (IC vs NC) side (left vs right), and phase of the pedal cycle (push vs recovery). Mean load at volitional fatigue in NC (351 W) was significantly greater than IC (318 W; p < 0.001). As external load increased, there was a similar increase in spine flexion angle in the sagittal plane for both NC (8.2
Indexed as
Identifiers
29238254PMC5721184W2801066253What 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.