ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024
Evaluating plantar biomechanics while descending a single step with different heights.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional differences between lower limbs during gait in relation to fall risk.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Dynamic balance control in healthy young women during stair descent: a plantar pressure-based study.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to investigate the plantar biomechanics of healthy young males as they descend a single transition step from varying heights. Methods: Thirty healthy young males participated the experiment using the F-scan insole plantar pressure system in which participants made single transition steps descent from four step heights (5, 15, 25, and 35 cm), leading with their dominant or non-dominant foot. Plantar pressure data were collected for 5 s during the period between landing touchdown and standing on the ground. Landing at each step height was repeated three times, with a five-minute rest between different height trials. Results: At 5 cm and 15 cm steps, participants demonstrated a rearfoot landing strategy on both sides. However, forefoot contact was observed at heights of 25 cm and 35 cm. Parameters related to center of plantar pressure (COP) of the leading foot were significantly larger compared to the trailing foot ( Conclusion: When the characteristics of biomechanical stability are compromised by step height, landing foot, and footedness factors - due to altered foot landing strategies, changing COP, or uneven force distribution - ability to control motion efficiently and respond adaptively to the forces experienced during movement is challenged, increasing the likelihood of loss of dynamic balance, with a consequent increased risk of ankle sprains and falls.
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.