ArticleSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2025
Gender-specific foot morphology and biomechanical patterns in young adults: a combined photogrammetric and plantar pressure analysis.
Article in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeUnderstanding gender-based foot morphological differences is critical for ergonomic footwear design. This study investigated these variations in young adults using photogrammetric and plantar pressure analysis.
methodsWe analyzed 200 healthy participants (100 males, 100 females; aged 19-21 years) through digital photogrammetry and RSscan Footscan pressure mapping. Key parameters included foot length (FL), ball width (BWF), hallux valgus angle (HVd), lateral foot angle (LdF), and Clarke's Index for arch classification. Plantar pressure distribution was assessed across 10 anatomical zones.
resultsWe revealed significant gender disparities: males had longer (26.6 vs. 25.2 cm) and wider feet (10.2 vs. 9.1 cm), while 75% of participants exhibited HVd (5.1°-6.3°), with no gender difference. Dynamic Clarke's Index showed 80% had high arches, correlating with lower BMI (p < 0.001). Pressure analysis highlighted higher midfoot loading (37.8-41.2 cm
conclusionIt emphasize prioritizing ergonomic footwear to mitigate pressure imbalances, HVd progression, and asymmetry, particularly in high-BMI individuals. This dual-method approach provides actionable insights for biomechanical applications and footwear customization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41184657What 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.