ArticlePloS one2024
Foot orientation and trajectory variability in locomotion: Effects of real-world terrain.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Estimating and interpreting how humans prioritize multiple movement goals during walking.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Capturing human locomotion in nearly any environment or context is becoming increasingly feasible with wearable sensors, giving access to commonly encountered walking conditions. While important in expanding our understanding of locomotor biomechanics, these more variable environments present challenges to identify changes in data due to person-level factors among the varying environment-level factors. Our study examined foot-specific biomechanics while walking on terrain commonly encountered with the goal of understanding the extent to which these variables change due to terrain. We recruited healthy adults to walk at self-selected speeds on stairs, flat ground, and both shallow and steep sloped terrain. A pair of inertial measurement units were embedded in both shoes to capture foot biomechanics while walking. Foot orientation was calculated using a strapdown procedure and foot trajectory was determined by double integrating the linear acceleration. Stance time, swing time, cadence, sagittal and frontal orientations, stride length and width were extracted as discrete variables. These data were compared within-participant and across terrain conditions. The physical constraints of the stairs resulted in shorter stride lengths, less time spent in swing, toe-first foot contact, and higher variability during stair ascent specifically (p<0.05). Stride lengths increased when ascending compared to descending slopes, and the sagittal foot angle at initial contact was greatest in the steep slope descent condition (p<0.05). No differences were found between conditions for horizontal foot angle in midstance (p≥0.067). Our results show that walking on slopes creates differential changes in foot biomechanics depending on whether one is descending or ascending, and stairs require different biomechanics and gait timing than slopes or flat ground. This may be an important factor to consider when making comparisons of real-world walking bouts, as greater proportions of one terrain feature in a data set could create bias in the outcomes. Classifying terrain in unsupervised walking datasets would be helpful to avoid comparing metrics from different walking terrain scenarios.
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.