ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2026
Reaching accuracy declines with postural demand during whole-body leaning.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Whole-body movements in everyday tasks challenge the neuromuscular system. Prior studies have shown that appropriate postural control supports both task success and postural balance during quiet standing or under modest postural demands. However, it remains unclear how the central nervous system controls whole-body posture under high-demand conditions, such as maximal leaning postures. Here, we investigated how varying postural demands influence task performance in whole-body tasks. Methods: We used an upper-body reaching task in which participants leaned their upper body mediolaterally to reach a target without falling. Our task required various upper-body positions and accelerations by varying target positions and time constraints to reach a target. Therefore, our task induced participants to different magnitudes of destabilizing torque, which is defined as postural demand. Task performance in response to different target positions and time constraints was evaluated based on reaching accuracy. Results: Target position, time constraint, and movement distance significantly affected reaching accuracy. Specifically, participants could accurately reach targets requiring upright or moderately leaning postures. However, when targets required greater leaning postures, participants failed to reach them. Furthermore, the detrimental effects of shorter time constraints and longer movement distances on reaching accuracy became more pronounced when target positions required greater leaning postures. Discussion: These findings demonstrate that reaching accuracy was preserved under low to modest postural demands, but deteriorated once postural demands became high.
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.