ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Evaluation of safety boots and their relationships with the foot structure of female and male industrial workers.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWorking conditions and the variety of activities performed in different occupations require footwear that meets the safety needs of the worker. More and more females are entering the industrial environment, which until recently was dominated by males, so there are indications of problems in adapting safety footwear to female feet. The aim of this research was to evaluate foot characteristics as well as perceived comfort, functionality and attractiveness of safety boots and their mutual relationships among production workers.
methodsThe study included 80 industrial workers aged 50–60 years (35 females; 45 males). The foot was evaluated using the CQ-ST Podoscope. Perception of comfort, functionality and attractiveness of GALMAG safety boots were evaluated. The research results were analyzed using Student’s t-test for independent variables, Mann-Whitney U-test and Spearman’s rank correlation.
resultsStatistically significant gender differences were found in terms of individualization (p = 0.044) and attractiveness of shoes (p = 0.041), as well as relationships of right (p = 0.010) and left (p = 0.030) foot width with shoe length perception, and Clarke’s angle of the right (p = 0. 004) and left (p = 0.020) foot with heel cushioning, Clarke’s angle of the right (p = 0.020) and left (p = 0.003) foot with shoe weight ratings, and Clarke’s angle of the right (p = 0.007) and left (p = 0.029) foot with shoe breathability. Clarke’s angle of the right (p = 0.020) and left (p = 0.049) foot also correlated with ratings of shoe style, and β angle of the right foot with shoe weight (p = 0.042) and breathability (p = 0.043).
conclusionsIt is necessary to develop recommendations for designers and manufacturers of safety boots to move away from the production of unisex footwear and the use of female’s lasts in the production of female footwear. Different widths for the same length should be considered when designing safety boots. People with high arches need better cushioning and therefore prefer insoles made of soft, flexible materials. More comfortable footwear is also more functional and aesthetically pleasing. Therefore, considering these aspects in the design and manufacture of footwear can result in the proper functioning of the worker in the workplace.
trial registrationNot required, as the study design envisaged no health interventions whatsoever.
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.