Background
Methods
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Search strategy
Quality assessment
Data extraction
Statistical analysis
Results
Search results
Study quality
Author | Reporting (score/11) | External validity (score/3) | Bias (score/7) | Confounding (score/6) | Power (score/5) | Total (score/32) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Alcantara et al. [21] | 7 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 17 |
Kristen et al. [15] | 7 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 20 |
Lieberman et al. [25] | 5 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 19 |
Lythgo et al. [7] | 8 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 24 |
Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] | 7 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 20 |
Mueller et al. [22] | 6 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 20 |
Oeffinger et al. [9] | 6 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 18 |
Tazuke [26] | 4 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 11 |
Wegener et al. [23] | 8 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 23 |
Wilkinson et al. [20] | 11 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 27 |
Wolf et al. [8] | 8 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 21 |
Participants
Author | Design | Sample size | Participants | Gait type | Shoe conditions | Outcome measure/s |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Alcantara et al. [21] | Randomised repeated measures | 8 | 4 girls and 4 boys, aged 7 to 14 years, mean age 10 years | run | barefoot/athletic/walking/walking | Kinetics |
Kristen et al. [15] | Repeated measures | 30 | 1.8-4.8 years | walk | barefoot/walking | Spatio-temporal, kinetics |
Lieberman et al. [25] | Repeated measures | 17 | 10 boys, 7 girls mean age 15 years | run | barefoot/unknown | Spatio- temporal kinematics, |
Lythgo et al. [7] | Repeated measures | 898 | 52% boys, aged 5-12 years | walk | barefoot/athletic | Spatio-temporal |
Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] | Repeated measures | 61 | 31 girls, 30 boys, aged 10-13 years, | walk | barefoot/unknown | Spatio-temporal |
Mueller et al. [22] | Randomised repeated measures | 234 | 2-15 years, mean age 7.7 years | treadmill walk | barefoot/unknown | Electromyography |
Oeffinger et al. [9] | Randomised repeated measures | 14 | 8 females, 6 males aged 7-14 years | walk | barefoot/athletic | Spatio-temporal, kinematics |
Tazuke [26] | Repeated measures | 4 | 3 girls, 1 boy aged 8-13 years, mean age 10 years | run | barefoot/unknown | Spatio-temporal, kinematics |
Wegener et al. [23] | Randomised repeated measures | 20 | 8 girls, 12 boys aged 6-13 years, mean age 9 years | walk | barefoot/Oxford shoe | Spatio-temporal, kinematics |
Wilkinson et al. [20] | Randomised repeated measures | 31 | 17 girls, 14 boys, aged 1.1-2.7 years, mean age 1.6 years | walk | barefoot/athletic/Oxford shoe | Spatio-temporal, kinematics |
Wolf et al. [8] | Repeated measures | 18 | 8 girls, 10 boys aged 6-10 years, mean age 8 years | walk | barefoot/walking/flexible walking | Spatio-temporal, kinematics |
Shoe conditions
Description and methodological approach of included studies
Spatio-temporal findings
Variable | Shoe Condition | Authors | n | Weighting | Mean difference [95%CI] | Statistical significance: z Score (P) | Heterogeneity: I
2% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Velocity (m/s) | Athletic | Lythgo et al. [7]* | 898 | 94.0% | 0.07 [0.06, 0.09] | - | 98% |
Unknown | Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] | 61 | 2.2% | 0.05 [-0.01, 0.12] | - | - | |
Athletic | Oeffinger et al. [9] | 14 | 0.8% | 0.04 [-0.08, 0.16] | - | - | |
Oxford | Wegener et al.[23] | 20 | 0.9% | 0.03 [-0.08, 0.14] | - | - | |
Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 1.4% | -0.01 [-0.10, 0.08] | - | - | |
Combined | Pooled effect | 1011 | 100.0% | 0.07 [0.06, 0.08] | 12.97 (P < 0.00001) | 97% | |
Walking (greater flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | 0.02 [-0.07, 0.11] | 0.41 (P = 0.68) | N/A | |
Stride length (m) | Athletic | Lythgo et al. [7]* | 781 | 97.60% | 0.11 [0.11, 0.12] | - | 97% |
Unknown | Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] | 61 | 1.10% | 0.07 [0.02, 0.12] | - | - | |
Athletic | Oeffinger et al. [9] | 14 | 0.30% | 0.12 [0.02, 0.21] | - | - | |
Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 0.20% | 0.11 [0.00, 0.22] | - | - | |
Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 0.70% | 0.07 [0.01, 0.13] | - | - | |
Combined | Pooled effect | 894 | 100.0% | 0.11 [0.10, 0.12] | 40.49 (P < 0.00001) | 93% | |
Walking (greater flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | 0.06 [-0.01, 0.13] | 1.71 (P = 0.09) | N/A | |
Step length (%) | Walking | Kristen et al. [15] | 30 | 6.2% | 0.20 [-2.26, 2.66] | - | - |
Athletic | Lythgo et al. [7]* | 781 | 87.5% | 9.69 [8.77, 10.61] | - | 100% | |
Unknown | Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] | 61 | 6.3% | 6.57 [4.14, 8.99] | - | - | |
Combined | Pooled effect | 872 | 100.0% | 8.90 [8.04, 9.77] | 20.16 (P < 0.00001) | 100% | |
Length (m) | Oxford | Wilkinson et al. [20] | 31 | 100.0% | 0.03 [-0.01, 0.07] | 1.52 (P = 0.13) | N/A |
Athletic | Wilkinson et al. [20] | 30 | 100.0% | 0.04 [0.00, 0.07] | 2.25 (P = 0.02) | N/A | |
Stride time (s) | Athletic | Lythgo et al. [7]* | 790 | 94.0% | 0.03 [0.02, 0.04] | - | 99% |
Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 2.6% | 0.08 [0.03, 0.13] | - | - | |
Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 3.4% | 0.07 [0.03, 0.11] | - | - | |
Combined | Pooled effect | 828 | 100.0% | 0.03 [0.02, 0.04] | 7.61 (P < 0.00001) | 99% | |
Walking (greater flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | 0.03 [-0.01, 0.07] | 1.50 (P = 0.13) | N/A | |
Step time (s) | Athletic | Lythgo et al. [7]* | 728 | 100.0% | 0.01 [0.01, 0.02] | 5.25 (P < 0.00001) | 99% |
Time | Oxford | Wilkinson et al. [20] | 31 | 100.0% | -0.40 [-1.98, 1.18] | 0.50 (P = 0.62) | N/A |
Athletic | Wilkinson et al. [20] | 30 | 100.0% | -0.20 [-1.98, 1.58] | 0.22 (P = 0.83) | N/A | |
Cadence (steps/min) | Athletic | Lythgo et al. [7]* | 471 | 70.5% | -5.68 [-9.05, -2.31] | - | 100% |
Unknown | Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] | 61 | 11.0% | -3.51 [-8.51, 1.49] | - | - | |
Athletic | Oeffinger et al. [9] | 14 | 4.2% | -8.30 [-19.76, 3.16] | - | - | |
Oxford | Wilkinson et al. [20] | 31 | 4.1% | -2.10 [-13.80, 9.60] | - | - | |
Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 10.3% | -8.70 [-14.11, -3.29] | - | - | |
Combined | Pooled effect | 564 | 100.0% | -5.71 [-8.39, -3.02] | 4.16 (P < 0.0001) | 99% | |
Oxford | Wilkinson et al. [20] | 31 | 100.0% | -0.20 [-9.99, 9.59 | 0.04 (P = 0.97) | N/A | |
Walking (greater flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -4.60 [-9.99, 0.79] | 1.67 (P = 0.09) | N/A | |
Support base (m) | Athletic | Lythgo et al. [7]* | 753 | 99.1% | 0.01 [0.00, 0.01] | - | 89% |
Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 0.5% | 0.01 [-0.01, 0.03] | - | - | |
Oxford | Wilkinson et al. [20] | 31 | 0.4% | 0.01 [-0.00, 0.03] | - | - | |
Combined | Pooled effect | 804 | 100.0% | 0.01 [0.00, 0.01] | 9.23 (P < 0.00001) | 96% | |
Athletic | Wilkinson et al. [20] | 30 | 100.0% | 0.00 [-0.01, 0.02] | 0.49 (P = 0.62) | N/A | |
Toe-off (%) of gait cycle | Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | 2.30 [1.61, 2.99] | 6.56 (P < 0.00001) | N/A |
Walking (greater flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | 2.20 [1.51, 2.89] | 6.28 (P < 0.00001) | N/A | |
Double support (%) | Athletic | Lythgo et al.* | 898 | 100.0% | 1.53 [1.30, 1.77] | - | 99% |
Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 0.0% | 2.49 [-14.15, 19.13] | - | - | |
Combined | Pooled effect | 918 | 100.0% | 1.54 [1.27, 1.80] | 11.40 (P < 0.00001) | 99% | |
Single support (%) | Athletic | Lythgo et al. [7]* | 898 | 100.0% | -0.79 [-0.92, -0.65] | 11.26 (P < 0.00001) | 99% |
Stance time (%) | Athletic | Lythgo et al. [7]* | 898 | 98.50% | 0.81 [0.70, 0.92] | - | - |
Unknown | Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] | 61 | 1.5% | 0.74 [-0.12, 1.60] | - | - | |
Combined | Pooled effect | 959 | 100.0% | 0.81 [0.70, 0.92] | 14.24 (P < 0.00001) | 98% | |
Swing time (%) | Shoe | Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] | 61 | 100.0% | -0.74 [-1.60, 0.12] | 1.68 (P = 0.09) | N/A |
Contact time (ms) | Walking | Kristen et al. [15] | 30 | 100% | 49.00 [-9.88, 107.88] | 1.63 (P = 0.10) | N/A |
Angle of gait (°) | Athletic | Lythgo et al. [7]* | 898 | 99.9% | -0.03 [-0.34, 0.28] | - | 98% |
Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 0.1% | -3.10 [-16.02, 9.82] | - | - | |
Combined | Pooled effect | 916 | 100.0% | -0.03 [-0.35, 0.29] | 0.19 (P = 0.85) | 98% | |
Walking (greater flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -2.50 [-5.58, 0.58] | 1.59 (P = 0.11) | N/A | |
Progression angle (°) | Oxford | Wilkinson et al. [20] | 31 | 100.0% | -2.50 [-7.32, 2.32] | 1.02 (P = 0.31) | N/A |
Athletic | Wilkinson et al. [20] | 30 | 100.0% | -0.40 [-5.19, 4.39] | 0.16 (P = 0.87) | N/A |
Variable | Shoe Condition | Authors | n | Weighting | Mean difference [95%CI] | Statistical significance: z Score (P) | Heterogeneity: I
2% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Running velocity (m/s) | Unknown | Lieberman et al. [25] | 17 | 100.0% | -0.20 [-0.54, 0.14] | 1.17 (P = 0.24) | N/A |
Sprinting velocity (m/s) | Unknown | Tazuke [26] | 4 | 100.0% | -0.16 [-0.77, 0.45] | 0.52 (P = 0.60) | N/A |
Kinematic findings
Variable | Shoe Condition | Authors | n | Weighting | Mean difference [95%CI] | Statistical significance: z Score (P) | Heterogeneity: I
2% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hallux flexion ROM(°) | Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 64.5% | -11.52 [-13.64, -9.40] | - | - |
Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 35.5% | -11.40 [-14.26, -8.54] | - | - | |
Combined | Pooled effect | 38 | 100.0% | -11.48 [-13.18, -9.78] | 13.22 (P < 0.00001) | 0% | |
Walking (increased flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -9.30 [-12.29, -6.31] | 6.09 (P < 0.00001) | N/A | |
Sagittal tibia-rearfoot ROM (°) | Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 43.5% | 1.24 [-1.80, 4.28] | - | - |
Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 56.5% | 4.10 [1.84, 6.36] | - | - | |
Combined | Pooled effect | 38 | 100.0% | 2.86 [0.08, 5.64] | 2.01 (P = 0.04) | 54% | |
Walking (increased flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | 3.20 [0.91, 5.49] | 2.74 (P = 0.006) | N/A | |
Sagittal tibia-foot ROM (°) | Oxford | Wilkinson et al. [20] | 27 | 49.3% | 6.40 [3.40, 9.40] | - | - |
Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 50.4% | -0.80 [-3.53, 1.93] | - | - | |
Combined | Pooled effect | 45 | 100.0% | 2.75 [-4.31, 9.80] | 0.76 (P = 0.45) | 91% | |
Athletic | Wilkinson et al.[20] | 26 | 100.0% | 7.60 [4.13, 11.07] | 4.29 (P < 0.0001) | N/A | |
Walking (increased flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -1.00 [-3.82, 1.82] | 0.70 (P = 0.49) | N/A | |
Medial arch length ROM (°) | Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -4.00 [-5.35, -2.65] | 5.82 (P < 0.00001) | N/A |
Walking (increased flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -3.90 [-5.32, -2.48] | 5.37 (P < 0.00001) | N/A | |
'Subtalar' rotation ROM(°) | Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | 0.90 [-0.09, 1.89] | 1.78 (P = 0.07) | N/A |
Walking (increased flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | 1.10 [0.11, 2.09] | 2.18 (P = 0.03) | N/A | |
Foot torsion ROM (°) | Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -5.10 [-6.67, -3.53] | 6.36 (P < 0.00001) | N/A |
Walking (increased flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -4.60 [-6.27, -2.93] | 5.41 (P < 0.00001) | N/A | |
Forefoot supination ROM (°) | Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -1.90 [-3.48, -0.32] | 2.36 (P = 0.02) | N/A |
Walking (increased flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -1.90 [-3.40, -0.40] | 2.48 (P = 0.01) | N/A | |
Foot rotation ROM (°) | Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -2.20 [-4.88, 0.48] | 1.61 (P = 0.11) | N/A |
Walking (increased flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -1.50 [-4.32, 1.32] | 1.04 (P = 0.30) | N/A | |
Forefoot width ROM (%) | Walking | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -5.40 [-6.97, -3.83] | 6.74 (P < 0.00001) | N/A |
Walking (increased flexibility) | Wolf et al. [8] | 18 | 100.0% | -3.80 [-5.37, -2.23] | 4.74 (P < 0.00001) | N/A | |
Midfoot sagittal plane ROM (°) | Oxford | Wegener et al.[23] | 20 | 100.0% | -7.44 [-11.15, -3.73] | 3.93 (P < 0.0001) | N/A |
Midfoot frontal plane ROM (°) | Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 100.0% | -3.07 [-5.04, -1.10] | 3.06 (P = 0.002) | N/A |
Midfoot transverse plane ROM (°) | Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 100.0% | -5.01 [-6.55, -3.48] | 6.39 (P < 0.00001) | N/A |
Rearfoot frontal plane ROM (°) | Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 100.0% | -1.68 [-4.27, 0.90] | 1.28 (P = 0.20) | N/A |
Rearfoot transverse plane ROM (°) | Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 100.0% | 0.39 [-2.52, 3.29] | 0.26 (P = 0.79) | N/A |
Knee sagittal plane ROM (°) | Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 100.0% | 9.21 [3.22, 15.21] | 3.01 (P = 0.003) | N/A |
Knee frontal plane ROM (°) | Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 100.0% | 0.02 [-1.48, 1.52] | 0.02 (P = 0.98) | N/A |
Knee transverse plane ROM (°) | Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 100.0% | -0.13 [-4.80, 4.55] | 0.05 (P = 0.96) | N/A |
Hip sagittal plane ROM (°) | Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 100.0% | 2.04 [-1.21, 5.29] | 1.23 (P = 0.22) | N/A |
Hip frontal plane ROM (°) | Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 100.0% | -0.40 [-2.39, 1.58] | 0.40 (P = 0.69) | N/A |
Hip transverse plane ROM (°) | Oxford | Wegener et al. [23] | 20 | 100.0% | 1.10 [-1.05, 3.25] | 1.00 (P = 0.32) | N/A |
Ankle max dorsiflexion (°) | Oxford | Wilkinson et al.[20] | 27 | 100.0% | -7.20 [-11.18, -3.22] | 3.54 (P = 0.0004) | N/A |
Athletic | Wilkinson et al.[20] | 26 | 100.0% | -1.70 [-5.45, 2.05] | 0.89 (P = 0.37) | N/A | |
Ankle angle at foot lift (°) | Oxford | Wilkinson et al.[20] | 27 | 100.0% | -5.70 [-10.45, -0.95] | 2.35 (P = 0.02) | N/A |
Athletic | Wilkinson et al.[20] | 26 | 100.0% | -1.50 [-5.92, 2.92] | 0.67 (P = 0.51) | N/A | |
Ankle max plantarflexion (°) | Oxford | Wilkinson et al.[20] | 27 | 100.0% | -0.70 [-5.94, 4.54] | 0.26 (P = 0.79) | N/A |
Athletic | Wilkinson et al.[20] | 26 | 100.0% | 5.80 [1.58, 10.02] | 2.69 (P = 0.007) | N/A | |
Ankle ROM, foot lift to max plantarflexion (°) | Oxford | Wilkinson et al.[20] | 27 | 100.0% | 5.00 [1.79, 8.21] | 3.05 (P = 0.002) | N/A |
Athletic | Wilkinson et al.[20] | 26 | 100.0% | 7.30 [3.56, 11.04] | 3.82 (P = 0.0001) | N/A |
Variable | Shoe Condition | Authors | n | Weighting | Mean difference [95%CI] | Statistical significance: z Score (P) | Heterogeneity: I
2% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ankle angle at foot strike (°) | Unknown | Lieberman et al. [25] | 17 | 100.0% | -6.80 [-13.52, -0.08] | 1.98 (P = 0.049) | N/A |
Plantar foot angle at foot strike (°) | Unknown | Lieberman et al. [25] | 17 | 100.0% | -9.70 [-16.43, -2.97] | 2.83 (P = 0.005) | N/A |
Knee angle at foot strike (°) | Unknown | Lieberman et al. [25] | 17 | 100.0% | -0.50 [-4.90, 3.90] | 0.22 (P = 0.82) | N/A |
Knee lift angle (°) | Unknown | Tazuke [26] | 4 | 100.0% | -1.20 [-16.25, 13.84] | 0.16 (P = 0.88) | N/A |
Knee angular velocity (°/s) | Unknown | Tazuke [26] | 4 | 100.0% | -160.59 [-304.34, -16.83] | 2.19 (P = 0.03) | N/A |
Swing-back velocity (°/s) | Unknown | Tazuke [26] | 4 | 100.0% | -84.24 [-158.64, -9.84] | 2.22 (P = 0.03) | N/A |
Kinetic findings
Variable | Shoe Condition | Authors | n | Weighting | Mean difference [95%CI] | Statistical significance: z Score(P) | Heterogeneity: I
2% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Vertical ground reaction force (%BW) | Walking | Kristen et al. [15] | 30 | 100.0% | 6.30 [-2.82, 15.42] | 1.35 (P = 0.18) | N/A |
Anterior Posterior Max GRF (%BW) | Walking | Kristen et al. [15] | 30 | 100.0% | -0.90 [-3.66, 1.86] | 0.64 (P = 0.52) | N/A |
Anterior Posterior Min GRF (%BW) | Walking | Kristen et al. [15] | 30 | 100.0% | -1.00 [-5.99, 3.99] | 0.39 (P = 0.69) | N/A |
Variable | Shoe Condition | Authors | n | Weighting | Mean difference [95%CI] | Statistical significance: z Score (P) | Heterogeneity: I
2% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Max vertical impact force (BW) | Athletic | Alcantara et al. [21] (girls) | 4 | 49.4% | -0.32 [-0.42, -0.22] | - | - |
Athletic | Alcantara et al. [21] (boys) | 4 | 50.6% | 0.05 [-0.01, 0.11] | - | - | |
Athletic | Pooled effect | 8 | 100.0% | -0.13 [-0.50, 0.23] | 0.72 (P = 0.47) | 97% | |
Walking | Alcantara et al. [21] (girls) | 4 | 49.9% | -0.16 [-0.22, -0.10] | - | - | |
Walking | Alcantara et al. [21] (boys) | 4 | 50.1% | -0.68 [-0.73, -0.63] | - | - | |
Walking | Pooled effect | 8 | 100.0% | -0.42 [-0.93, 0.09] | 1.62 (P = 0.11) | 99% | |
Rate of load at impact (BW/s) | Athletic | Alcantara et al. [21] (girls) | 4 | 49.5% | -139.71 [-161.60, -117.82] | - | - |
Athletic | Alcantara et al. [21] (boys) | 4 | 50.5% | -43.64 [-56.16, -31.12] | - | - | |
Athletic | Pooled effect | 8 | 100.0% | -91.24 [-185.38, 2.90] | 1.90 (P = 0.06) | 98% | |
Walking | Alcantara et al. [21] (girls) | 4 | 49.6% | -146.63 [-168.67, -124.59] | - | - | |
Walking | Alcantara et al. [21] (boys) | 4 | 50.4% | -41.88 [-54.47, -29.29] | - | - | |
Walking | Pooled effect | 8 | 100.0% | -93.85 [-196.50, 8.80] | 1.79 (P = 0.07) | 98% | |
Long axis max tibial acceleration (g) | Athletic | Alcantara et al. [21] (girls) | 4 | 49.9% | -2.16 [-2.61, -1.71] | - | - |
Athletic | Alcantara et al. [21] (boys) | 4 | 50.1% | -0.94 [-1.37, -0.51] | - | - | |
Athletic | Pooled effect | 8 | 100.0% | -1.55 [-2.74, -0.35] | 2.54 (P = 0.01) | 93% | |
Walking | Alcantara et al. [21] (girls) | 4 | 49.7% | -2.65 [-3.12, -2.18] | - | - | |
Walking | Alcantara et al. [21] (boys) | 4 | 50.3% | -1.67 [-2.11, -1.23] | - | - | |
Walking | Pooled effect | 8 | 100.0% | -2.16 [-3.12, -1.20] | 4.40 (P < 0.0001) | 89% | |
Rate of tibia acceleration (g/s) | Athletic | Alcantara et al. [21] (girls) | 4 | 50.6% | -252.59 [-292.21, -212.97] | - | - |
Athletic | Alcantara et al. [21] (boys) | 4 | 49.4% | -135.17 [-181.84, -88.50] | - | - | |
Athletic | Pooled effect | 8 | 100.0% | -194.56 [-309.62, -79.49] | 3.31 (P = 0.0009) | 93% | |
Walking | Alcantara et al. [21] (girls) | 4 | 56.4% | -261.63 [-302.88, -220.38] | - | - | |
Walking | Alcantara et al. [21] (boys) | 4 | 43.6% | -145.83 [-192.73, -98.93] | - | - | |
Walking | Pooled effect | 8 | 100.0% | -211.13 [-242.11, -180.16] | 13.36 (P < 0.00001) | 92% | |
Shock wave transmission as a ratio of maximum acceleration (g/BW) | Athletic | Alcantara et al. [21] (girls) | 4 | 54.8% | -0.35 [-0.57, -0.13] | - | - |
Athletic | Alcantara et al. [21] (boys) | 4 | 45.2% | -0.59 [-0.86, -0.32] | - | - | |
Athletic | Pooled effect | 8 | 100.0% | -0.46 [-0.69, -0.22] | 3.84 (P = 0.0001) | 45% | |
Walking | Alcantara et al. [21] (girls) | 4 | 50.1% | -0.14 [-0.40, 0.12] | - | - | |
Walking | Alcantara et al. [21] (boys) | 4 | 49.9% | -0.78 [-1.05, -0.51] | - | - | |
Walking | Pooled effect | 8 | 100.0% | -0.46 [-1.09, 0.17] | 1.43 (P = 0.15) | 91% |