ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
Mechanobiological and neuromuscular responses to foot-position variations during front and back squat exercises.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study investigated the mechanobiological and neuromuscular effects of three foot-position techniques-flat heel (FH), heel-elevated (HE), and forefoot-elevated (FE)-during front and back squat exercises. Variations in foot positioning were expected to influence muscle activation, joint kinematics, ground reaction forces, and postural stability. Methods: Twelve resistance-trained male athletes (mean age 23.4 ± 3.8 years; training experience 8.1 ± 2.7 years) performed squats at 70% of their one-repetition maximum (1RM) under each foot-position condition. Surface electromyography (EMG) assessed lower-limb muscle activation, while joint angles and ground reaction forces were collected through synchronized motion-capture and force-platform analyses. Measures included EMG amplitude, joint kinematics, ground reaction forces, and center-of-pressure (COP) displacement. Results: Quadriceps muscles (vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, rectus femoris) showed significantly greater activation in FH and HE compared with FE (p < 0.001), particularly during the ascent phase. Heel-elevated increased ankle dorsiflexion and squat depth, whereas FE reduced vertical ground reaction forces and shifted mechanical loading toward the posterior chain. No significant differences were observed in COPx or COPy across conditions. Discussion: Foot-position variations meaningfully altered mechanical load distribution and neuromuscular activation patterns, demonstrating human-scale mechanotransduction. The findings suggest that technique selection should be tailored to individual mobility, joint mechanics, and performance goals to optimize training outcomes and reduce injury risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.