↓ Skip to main content

The Glasgow‐Maastricht foot model, evaluation of a 26 segment kinematic model of the foot

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 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
The Glasgow‐Maastricht foot model, evaluation of a 26 segment kinematic model of the foot
Published in
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13047-016-0152-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michiel Oosterwaal, Sylvain Carbes, Scott Telfer, James Woodburn, Søren Tørholm, Amir A. Al‐Munajjed, Lodewijk van Rhijn, Kenneth Meijer

Abstract

Accurately measuring of intrinsic foot kinematics using skin mounted markers is difficult, limited in part by the physical dimensions of the foot. Existing kinematic foot models solve this problem by combining multiple bones into idealized rigid segments. This study presents a novel foot model that allows the motion of the 26 bones to be individually estimated via a combination of partial joint constraints and coupling the motion of separate joints using kinematic rhythms. Segmented CT data from one healthy subject was used to create a template Glasgow-Maastricht foot model (GM-model). Following this, the template was scaled to produce subject-specific models for five additional healthy participants using a surface scan of the foot and ankle. Forty-three skin mounted markers, mainly positioned around the foot and ankle, were used to capture the stance phase of the right foot of the six healthy participants during walking. The GM-model was then applied to calculate the intrinsic foot kinematics. Distinct motion patterns where found for all joints. The variability in outcome depended on the location of the joint, with reasonable results for sagittal plane motions and poor results for transverse plane motions. The results of the GM-model were comparable with existing literature, including bone pin studies, with respect to the range of motion, motion pattern and timing of the motion in the studied joints. This novel model is the most complete kinematic model to date. Further evaluation of the model is warranted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 1%
Unknown 89 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 19%
Student > Master 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Researcher 8 9%
Professor 6 7%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 23 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 26 29%
Sports and Recreations 11 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Design 3 3%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 32 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

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 15 September 2016.
All research outputs
#7,421,110
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#6
of 6 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,648
of 372,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.2. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 372,885 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 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them