Foot strike pattern and movement variability have each been associated with running injuries. Foot contact angle (FCA) is a common measure of strike pattern. Thus, variability in FCA could be an important running injury risk factor. The purposes of this study were to compare (a) foot contact angle (FCA) and its variability between runners with and without injury history and, (b) FCA variability between habitual rearfoot strike (RFS) and non-RFS runners during a prolonged run. Twenty-three runners with and 21 without injury history participated. Motion capture was used to collect kinematic data during a 40 min treadmill run. Average FCA and its variability were compared between injury groups and among four time points. FCA and its variability were not different between runners with and without injury history or among time points during the run. FCA variability was lower in non-RFS compared to RFS runners (P < 0.001). Lower FCA variability in non-RFS runners may have implications for higher injury risks due to repeated localized tissue loading. Prospective analyses on the effects of lower FCA variability on injury risk are needed.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 02 November 2020.
All research outputs
#5,289,649
of 32,060,042 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports
#1,288
of 3,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,069
of 435,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports
#17
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,060,042 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,286 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 435,756 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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 56% of its contemporaries.
