ArticleExperimental brain research2025
Comparative analysis of muscle coordination patterns underlying different types of stepping movements.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Reactive stepping is crucial for preventing falls after losing balance. While perturbation-based training improves reactive step quality, voluntary step training appears less effective. To gain insight into the neural underpinnings of such task-specific effects, we examined the muscle coordination patterns of voluntary and reactive stepping. As an additional step type, we introduced action observation with motor simulation of reactive steps, as it has shown promise for improving reactive step quality without requiring real balance perturbations. Electromyographic signals were recorded from eight leg and trunk muscles of healthy young subjects (n = 15) during three step types: (1) reactive stepping following support-surface translations, (2) voluntary stepping in response to a visual stimulus, and (3) action observation with motor simulation of reactive steps, as demonstrated by a human actor. Each condition involved stepping with the right leg in five directions (anterior/45°anterior/lateral/45°posterior/posterior). Muscle synergy analysis was employed to identify muscle weights with corresponding temporal activation profiles, which were compared across step types. Step characteristics and body configurations at foot down were also compared. Three muscle synergies were consistently recruited across participants and step types. In reactive stepping, a majority of participants exhibited a fourth muscle synergy involving rectus femoris and soleus. Temporal activation coefficients and body configurations varied with step type. While largely similar muscle weights were found for the three types of stepping movements, higher levels of activation in reactive stepping presumably reflect the greater biomechanical challenge involved. These findings may help explain differences in effects between different step training protocols.
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.