ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2026
Foot bone structure and plantar soft tissue deformation behavior in different functional positions.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although the static structure of the foot arch has been extensively investigated, limited information exists on the deformation of arch bones and plantar soft tissue during gait. This study aimed to evaluate the dynamic changes in foot bones and plantar soft tissues at three key gait phases (non-weight-bearing, weight-bearing, and tiptoe positions) and to analyze sagittal plane arch motion. Methods: Sixty-seven participants underwent three-dimensional (3D) plantar scans and X-ray imaging in the three key positions. Radiographic measurements included the talo-first metatarsal angle, calcaneal pitch angle, medial arch angle, lateral arch angle, calcaneus-fifth metatarsal angle, anterior arch angle, and posterior arch angle. The arch index and arch volume were derived from a 3D foot model. Results: Significant differences were observed in radiographic angles and morphological parameters across positions (P<0.001). The calcaneal pitch angle and medial arch angle demonstrated the most notable changes, with arch volume increasing by 48.71% at the tiptoe position compared to weight-bearing. Participants were grouped by arch flexibility (flexible, neutral, and stiff), and the difference in changes in the medial arch angle, anterior arch angle and posterior arch angle in the flexible and stiff groups were significant (P<0.05). The change in the non-weight-bearing versus weight-bearing position in the flexible group was approximately 1.98 times greater than that in the stiff group. Conclusions: The arch changes during gait are complex. At the end of the support phase, the windlass mechanism drives arch reconstruction, while arch flexibility at this stage does not affect the arch reconstruction. However, differences in arch flexibility can directly lead to changes in arch buffering patterns during weight-bearing conditions. These findings advance the understanding of foot biomechanics and offer insights into foot function assessment, orthotic design, and therapeutic strategies.
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.