ArticleScientific reports2021
Changes in external ischial tuberosity width at varying trunk-thigh angles between sexes using two measurement methods.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development of low-cost pressure mapping device to evaluate force distribution for seat cushion modification.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study examined the influence of two methods and various trunk-thigh (TT) angles on external ischial tuberosity width (EITW) for 45 men and 45 women. In the experiment, the impress and seat pressure methods were applied at TT angles of 60°, 75°, 90°, and 105°. When the impress method was used, EITW remained highly consistent across the four measured TT angles with differences of 2.8 and 2.1 mm for men and women, respectively. Conversely, in the seated pressure method, EITW increased with TT angle such that differences in EITW across a full TT angle range were 11.5 and 11.7 mm for men and women, respectively. Irrespective of method, differences in EITW between genders measured approximately 12.6-13.7 mm across all TT angles. Correlation analyses revealed that hip circumference was positively related to EITW in all cases, whereas the relationship of hip width and depth with EITW varied by method and gender. Because of inherent differences in EITW between genders, these findings suggest that gender variability should be considered in seat cushion design.
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.