Observational studyEuropean journal of applied physiology2024
Postural adjustments and perceptual responses of Nordic running: concurrent effects of poles and irregular terrain.
Observational study in European journal of applied physiology, 2024. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIn the natural environment, humans must continuously negotiate irregular and unpredictable terrain. Recently, the poles have been extensively used during trial running events. However, we know little about how humans adjust posture and bilateral coordination to use poles in irregular terrain. Here, we compared kinematics, bilateral coordination and perceptual responses between regular (compact dust) and irregular terrain (medium-length grass) during running at preferred speed with and without poles.
methodsIn this transversal observational study, thirteen young healthy adults (8 men; mean ± SD; age 29.1 ± 8.0 years, body mass 76.8 ± 11.4 kg; height 1.75 ± 0.08 m) were evaluated during running at a self-selected comfortable speed with and without poles on regular and irregular terrains.
resultsOur results show that, despite more flexed pattern on lower-limb joints at irregular terrain, the usage of poles was not enough to re-stabilize the bilateral coordination. Also, the perceived exertion was impaired adding poles to running, probably due to more complex movement pattern using poles in comparison to free running, and the invariance in the bilateral coordination.
conclusionBesides the invariability of usage poles on bilateral coordination and lower-limb kinematics, the runners seem to prioritize postural stability over lower limb stiffness when running in medium-length grass given the larger range of ankle and knee motion observed in irregular terrain. Further investigations at rougher/hilly terrains will likely provide additional insights into the neuromotor control strategies used to maintain the stability and on perceptual responses using poles during running.
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.