ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
Kinematics and muscle activation of the lower limb during barefoot and flip-flop running.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFlip-flop and barefoot running are increasingly common; however, their biomechanical effects remain unclear. This study examined lower-limb kinematics and muscle activation during treadmill running under barefoot, conventional flip-flop, Y-Sandal, and shod conditions.
methodsSixteen volunteers were recruited to run on a treadmill under four footwear conditions at three speeds. A three-dimensional motion capture system was used to collect kinematic data, and the activities of the tibialis anterior, extensor digitorum longus, and flexor hallucis longus muscles were simultaneously recorded using a wireless electromyography system.
resultsBarefoot running was associated with higher cadence, whereas the Y-Sandal condition was associated with the shortest stance duration. The conventional flip-flop condition was associated with greater sagittal-plane hip motion compared with the Y-Sandal and shod conditions. The barefoot and conventional flip-flop conditions were associated with similar ankle and forefoot movement patterns in sagittal and frontal planes, whereas the Y-Sandal and shod conditions produced different patterns. Furthermore, significantly higher lower-leg muscle activation was observed under the conventional flip-flop and Y-Sandal conditions compared with the barefoot and shod conditions.
conclusionFootwear design significantly affects running biomechanics and neuromuscular strategies. Although barefoot running promotes a higher cadence, thong-style footwear increases the demand on the distal musculature. The specific design features of the Y-Sandal appear to mitigate the compensatory kinematic strategies typically observed with conventional flip-flops, resulting in movement patterns that more closely resemble those observed during shod running. These findings highlight the distinct neuromuscular demands and kinematic adaptations associated with different footwear interfaces.
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.