ArticleCureus2026
Gender-Based Variations in Navicular Drop and Foot Morphometry Among North Indian Adults: Implications for Foot Biomechanics and Clinical Assessment.
Article in Cureus, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study was undertaken to understand the effect of gender on foot morphology, including foot arch and foot index (FI), to comprehend their biomechanical implications and relationships in the North Indian adult population aged 20-50 years.
methodsA cross-sectional observational study was conducted among 600 healthy participants (300 male and 300 female participants) aged 20-50 years, excluding individuals with lower limb deformities or injuries. Navicular drop (ND) was measured using a standardized technique, including the modified Brody method. The FI was measured as foot breadth divided by foot length, multiplied by 100. Nonparametric statistical tests were applied because the data were nonnormally distributed.
resultsMale participants showed significantly larger foot dimensions (FD; length: 25.40 ± 1.60 cm; breadth: 9.59 ± 0.74 cm) compared with female participants (length: 24.97 ± 1.68 cm; breadth: 9.34 ± 0.93 cm), whereas FI demonstrated no significant difference (p = 0.067). Female participants represent a significantly higher ND (8.29 ± 2.29 mm) than male participants (6.74 ± 2.38 mm), suggesting a decrease in medial longitudinal arch (foot pronation). Though bilateral asymmetry was seen, it was clinically not relevant.
conclusionThese findings confirm the presence of gender-specific variation in foot morphology, with female participants exhibiting a high ND (foot pronation) and male participants demonstrating larger absolute FDs. The study underscores the importance of incorporating gender considerations into biomechanical assessments, rehabilitation strategies, and orthopedic footwear design, providing valuable evidence to inform personalized clinical and ergonomic interventions.
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.