↓ Skip to main content

A new method for sudden mechanical perturbation with axial load, to assess postural control in sitting and standing

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Biomechanics, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A new method for sudden mechanical perturbation with axial load, to assess postural control in sitting and standing
Published in
Journal of Biomechanics, February 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.02.039
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew P. Claus, Julius Verrel, Paul E.I. Pounds, Renee C. Shaw, Niamh Brady, Min T. Chew, Thomas A. Dekkers, Paul W. Hodges

Abstract

Sudden application of load along a sagittal or coronal axis has been used to study trunk stiffness, but not axial (vertical) load. This study introduces a new method for sudden-release axial load perturbation. Prima facie validity was supported by comparison with standard mechanical systems. We report the response of the human body to axial perturbation in sitting and standing and within-day repeatability of measures. Load of 20% of body weight was released from light contact onto the shoulders of 22 healthy participants (10 males). Force input was measured via force transducers at shoulders, output via a force plate below the participant, and kinematics via 3-D motion capture. System identification was used to fit data from the time of load release to time of peak load-displacement, fitting with a 2nd-order mass-spring-damper system with a delay term. At peak load-displacement, the mean (SD) effective stiffness measured with this device for participants in sitting was 12.0(3.4)N/mm, and in standing was 13.3(4.2)N/mm. Peak force output exceeded input by 44.8 (10.0)% in sitting and by 30.4(7.9)% in standing. Intra-class correlation coefficients for within-day repeatability of axial stiffness were 0.58 (CI: -0.03 to 0.83) in sitting and 0.82(0.57-0.93) in standing. Despite greater degrees of freedom in standing than sitting, standing involved lesser time, downward displacement, peak output force and was more repeatable in defending upright postural control against the same axial loads. This method provides a foundation for future studies of neuromuscular control with axial perturbation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 18%
Student > Master 9 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Researcher 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 24%
Engineering 9 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 16%
Computer Science 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 17 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 28 March 2016.
All research outputs
#15,092,197
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biomechanics
#3,667
of 5,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,574
of 311,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biomechanics
#35
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,357 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 311,884 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 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 52% of its contemporaries.