ArticlePloS one2025
A novel classification method for balance differences in elite versus expert athletes based on composite multiscale complexity index and ranking forests.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- Dual-Stream deep learning for multimodal feature fusion and classification of balance control in elite freestyle aerial skiers.PloS one · 2026Article
- Postural Control Adaptations in Trampoline Athletes of Different Competitive Levels: Insights from COP Linear and Nonlinear Measures.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Balance is crucial for various athletic tasks, and accurately assessing balance ability among elite athletes using simple and accessible measurement methods is a significant challenge in sports science. A common approach to balance assessment involves recording center of pressure (CoP) displacements using force platforms, with various indicators proposed to distinguish subtle balance differences. However, these indicators have not reached a consensus, and it remains unclear whether these analyses alone can fully explain the complex interactions of postural control. In this study, we investigated four parameters related to balance control-anterior-posterior (AP) displacement, medial-lateral (ML) displacement, length, and tilt angle-in 13 elite athletes and 12 freestyle skiing aerial expert athletes. Data were recorded during 30-second trials on both soft and hard support surfaces, with eyes open and closed. We calculated the CMCI and used four machine learning algorithms-Logistic Regression, Support Vector Machine(SVM), Naive Bayes, and Ranking Forest-to combine these features and assess each participant's balance ability. A classic train-test split method was applied, and the performance of different classifiers was evaluated using Receiver Operating Characteristic(ROC) analysis. The ROC results showed that traditional time-domain features were insufficient for accurately distinguishing athletes' balance abilities, whereas CMCI performed the best overall. Among all classifiers, the combination of CMCI and Ranking Forest yielded the best performance, with a sensitivity of 0.95 and specificity of 0.35. This nonlinear, multidimensional approach appears to be highly suitable for assessing the complexity of postural control.
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.