↓ Skip to main content

A minimal markerset for three-dimensional foot function assessment: measuring navicular drop and drift under dynamic conditions

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
A minimal markerset for three-dimensional foot function assessment: measuring navicular drop and drift under dynamic conditions
Published in
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13047-018-0257-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patric Eichelberger, Angela Blasimann, Nicole Lutz, Fabian Krause, Heiner Baur

Abstract

The validity of predicting foot pronation occurring mainly at the midfoot by surrogate measures from the rearfoot, like eversion excursion, is limited. The dynamic navicular mobility in terms of vertical navicular drop (dNDrop) and medial navicular drift (dNDrift) may be regarded as meaningful clinical indicators to represent overall foot function. This study aimed to develop a minimal approach to measure the two parameters and to examine their intra- and interday reliability during walking. The minimal markerset uses markers at the lateral and medial caput of the 1st and 5th metatarsals, respectively, at the dorsal calcaneus and at the tuberosity of the navicular bone. Dynamic navicular drop and drift were assessed with three-dimensional motion capture in 21 healthy individuals using a single-examiner test-retest study design. Intra- and interday repeatability were 1.1 mm (ICC21 0.97) and 2.3 mm (ICC21 0.87) for dynamic navicular drop and 1.5 mm (ICC21 0.96) and 5.3 mm (ICC21 0.46) for dynamic navicular drift. The contribution of instrumental errors was estimated to 0.25 mm for dynamic navicular drop and 0.86 mm for dynamic navicular drift. Interday reliability was generally worse than intraday reliability primary due to day-to-day variations in movement patterns and the contribution of instrumental errors was below 23% for dynamic navicular drop but reached 57% for dynamic navicular drift. The minimal markerset allows to simply transfer the known concepts of navicular drop and drift from quasi-static clinical test conditions to functional tasks, which is recommended to more closely relate assessments to the functional behavior of the foot.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 21%
Student > Bachelor 5 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Professor 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 5 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 14%
Sports and Recreations 3 11%
Engineering 2 7%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 7 25%

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 30 May 2018.
All research outputs
#3,551,869
of 14,054,727 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#299
of 553 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,007
of 276,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,054,727 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 553 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 276,439 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 67% 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