SynthesisSports medicine - open2025
Short-Term Effects of Wearing Commercially and Non-commercially Available Motion Control Footwear Versus Standard Shoes on Running Biomechanics in Adults: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Sports medicine - open, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is controversy in the literature with regards to the short-term effects of wearing footwear with motion control features on running mechanics and whether commercially available footwear with motion control features has extra benefits compared with non-commercially available motion control footwear. In this systematic review with meta-analysis, we investigated the effects of wearing commercially available and non-commercially available footwear with motion control features versus standard shoes applied during one experimental session on lower limb joint angles and moments during running in adults.
methodsFive electronic databases (Scopus, PubMed, EMBASE, PEDro, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL]) were systematically searched for articles potentially eligible for inclusion from inception until September 2025. Footwear with motion control features were classified into commercially available motion control footwear without additional modifications (shoes with dual midsole material) versus non-commercially available footwear incorporating self-manufactured motion control features (shoes with heel flare or wedge). The main difference between these shoe types is how they control foot pronation. The control condition comprised standard (neutral) shoes. The outcome parameters were lower limb kinematics (e.g., peak rearfoot eversion) and kinetics (e.g., peak ankle inversion moment) during running. The modified version of the Downs and Black checklist was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Within and between-group standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed using a random-effects model to elucidate the effects of (i) wearing footwear with motion control features (both commercially available motion control shoes and non commercially available footwear with motion control features) compared to standard shoes (total effects) and (ii) commercially available motion control footwear without additional modifications versus non-commercially available footwear incorporating self-manufactured motion control features (subgroup analysis).
resultsThe systematic search revealed 11,623 hits and finally 18 studies were eligible for inclusion of which 14 were used for quantitative analyses. We observed significant total effects of wearing footwear with motion control features versus standard shoes during running on the peak rearfoot eversion angle (six studies; SMDs = - 0.87, 95% CI - 1.38 to - 0.35, p = 0.001, I
conclusionsThis study revealed that wearing footwear with motion control features versus standard shoes has the potential to control rearfoot eversion and proximal segment motion in adults. The findings showed that wearing commercially available footwear with motion control features has extra benefits compared with non-commercially available motion control footwear. The observed findings for peak rearfoot eversion angle were statistically significant and clinically relevant. Nevertheless, more high-quality research is needed to elucidate the effects of footwear with motion control features application on running kinematics and kinetics as well as lower limb muscular activation.
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.