Giovana Y. Nakashima, Theresa H. Nakagawa, Ana F. dos Santos, Fábio V. Serrão, Michel Bessani, Carlos D. Maciel
Abstract
The knowledge of motion dynamics during running activity is crucial to enhance the development of rehabilitation techniques and injury prevention programs. Recent studies investigated the interaction between joints, using several analysis techniques, as cross-correlation, sensitivity analysis, among others. However, the direction of the joints pairing is still not understood. This paper proposes a study of the influence direction pattern in healthy runners by using kinematic data together with partial directed coherence, a frequency approach of Granger causality. The analysis was divided into three anatomical planes, sagittal, frontal, and transverse, and using data from ankle, knee, hip, and trunk segments. Results indicate a predominance of proximal to distal influence during running, reflecting a centralized anatomic source of movements. These findings highlight the necessity of managing proximal joints movements, in addition to motor control and core (trunk and hip) strengthening training to lumbar spine, knee, and ankle injuries prevention and rehabilitation.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 December 2017.
All research outputs
#6,099,611
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#847
of 6,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,840
of 328,927 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#9
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,714 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,927 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
