ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Gait biomechanics and postural adaptations in forward head posture: a comparative cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. 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.
- Modeling the Posture-Movement Continuum: Predictive Mapping of Spinopelvic Control Across Gait Speeds.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundForward head posture (FHP) is a common postural deviation in the sagittal plane. Despite the growing interest in FHP, research on gait biomechanics in individuals with FHP remains scarce. This study aimed to investigate gait biomechanics in FHP, with a gait performance-based craniovertebral angle (CVA) cut-off.
methodsForty-eight participants were included in the study, with CVA measurements used to assess head-and-neck posture. Three-dimensional kinematic and kinetic data were collected using a motion capture system during three walking trials at preferred speeds. Spatiotemporal gait parameters, joint angles, joint moments, joint powers, joint forces, center of mass (COM) trajectories, and COM-to-joint (knee and ankle) angles were analyzed. Time-series data were compared between the two groups using statistical parametric mapping to identify potential changes during the gait cycle.
resultsForty-eight participants were divided into control (n = 26) and FHP (n = 22) groups based on a CVA cut-off of 44 degrees determined by K-means clustering. There were no significant differences in spatiotemporal gait parameters between the control and FHP groups. However, the FHP group exhibited significantly increased trunk flexion during the loading response and initial midstance (2.21–14.50%, p = 0.047), as well as pre-swing and initial swing phases of the gait cycle (46.45–68.86%, p = 0.039). The COM-to-knee angle was significantly reduced during mid-swing in the FHP group (71.26–87.92%, p = 0.007). Additionally, significant differences in sagittal knee joint power and longitudinal joint forces at the knee and ankle were observed in the final stages of the gait cycle (p < 0.05). No significant differences were found in COM trajectories or other gait parameters.
conclusionThis study identified phase-specific compensatory trunk flexion in individuals with FHP, despite preserved overall gait characteristics. A CVA cut-off of 44 degrees was proposed as a criterion for diagnosing FHP based on walking performance. These findings suggest that individuals with FHP employ specific biomechanical adaptations to maintain gait stability and underscore the importance of considering biomechanical adaptations in FHP diagnosis.
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.