1,721,232 research outputs found

    The effect of uphill stride manipulation on race walking gait

    Full text link
    Stride length analysis represents an easy method for assessing race walking kinematics. However, the stride parameters emerging from such an analysis have never been used to design a training protocol aimed at increasing stride length. With this aim, we investigated the effects of stride frequency manipulation during three weeks of uphill (2%) training on stride length at iso-efficiency speed. Twelve male race walkers were randomly allocated to one of two training groups: stride frequency manipulation (RWM, n=6) and free stride frequency (RWF, n=6)

    Letter to the Editor concerning "Is the 4 mm height of the vertebral artery groove really a limitation of C1 pedicle screw insertion?" (by Da-Geng Huang, Si-Min He, Jun-Wei Pan, et al. Eur Spine J, 2014, 23(5):1109-1114)

    No full text
    Comment in Answer to the Letter to the Editor concerning "Is the 4 mm height of the vertebral artery groove really a limitation of C1 pedicle screw insertion" by Da-Geng Huang, et al. Eur Spine J (2014) 23(5):1109-1114. [Eur Spine J. 2014] Comment on Is the 4 mm height of the vertebral artery groove really a limitation of C1 pedicle screw insertion? [Eur Spine J. 2014

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore