Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38436020›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2024

Bilateral movement asymmetries exist in recreational athletes during a 45° sidestep cut post-anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Montana Kaiyala, J J Hannigan, Andrew Traut, Christine Pollard

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Montana Kaiyala *Program in Physical Therapy, College of Health, Oregon State University-Cascades, Bend, Oregon, United States.
J J Hannigan *Program in Physical Therapy, College of Health, Oregon State University-Cascades, Bend, Oregon, United States.
Andrew TrautProgram in Kinesiology, College of Health, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, United States.
Christine PollardProgram in Physical Therapy, College of Health, Oregon State University-Cascades, Bend, Oregon, United States.
Oregon State University Cascades · USOregon State University · US

Funding

Layman Fellowship Program at Oregon State University-Cascades
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individuals post-ACL reconstruction (ACLR) are at elevated risk for ACL re-injury. While several studies have examined biomechanical asymmetries post-ACLR during landing, less is known about asymmetries during a sidestep cut. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare sagittal and frontal plane biomechanics at the hip and knee during a 45° sidestep cut in post-ACLR participants and healthy controls. Nineteen athletes post-ACLR and nineteen healthy controls performed a bilateral 45° sidestep cut while three-dimensional kinematics and kinetics were measured. Sagittal and frontal plane kinematics and kinetics were examined at the hip and knee during stance phase. A linear mixed model compared biomechanical differences between the limbs of ACLR and healthy control participants (α = 0.05). In the post-ACLR group, peak hip extension, peak knee flexion, sagittal hip and knee excursion, and the peak knee extensor moment were significantly lower in the ACLR surgical limb compared to the non-surgical limb (

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionAnterior Cruciate LigamentAthletesExtremitiesHumansKnee JointAnterior cruciate ligamentBiomechanicsChange of directionCutting

Identifiers

PMID38436020
PMCPMC10908263
OpenAlexW4392234220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.