ArticleScientific reports2025
Effects of various static calibration postures on knee mechanics during locomotor tasks using statistical parametric mapping analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Cortical activation, gait performance, and muscle activation during dual-task walking in older adults with mild cognitive impairment.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Effect of visual disruption on the lower limb kinematic and kinetic characteristics in athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aims to examine the effects of various static standing postures on knee biomechanics during dynamic activities, including walking, running, and jumping. Twenty healthy participants (10 males and 10 females; age: 24.7 ± 1.3 years; height: 1.73 ± 0.08 m; weight: 66.5 ± 10.7 kg) performed three distinct static calibration trials: (1) 30° toe-in, (2) 0° neutral posture, and (3) 30° toe-out, before walking, running, and jumping at self-selected speeds. The primary outcome measures included knee joint angles and moments in the sagittal (flexion/extension), frontal (adduction/abduction), and transverse (internal/external rotation) planes. Repeated-measures ANOVA with statistical parametric mapping (SPM) was conducted to evaluate differences across static calibration posture trials. Compared to the neutral (0°) posture, the 30° toe-in posture significantly increased knee adduction angle, external rotation angle, and adduction moment, while reducing knee flexion angle and extension moment during walking, running, and jumping. Conversely, the 30° toe-out posture increased knee abduction angle and internal rotation angle, while decreasing knee adduction moment, relative to the neutral posture. When comparing the toe-out to toe-in postures, the toe-out posture yielded greater knee flexion, abduction, and internal rotation angles, but a reduced adduction moment across all tasks. Static calibration postures significantly affect knee biomechanics, highlighting the necessity for standardized positioning in clinical assessments to prevent obscuring or amplifying clinical outcomes.
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.