Abstracts represent current interpretations and study designs — not final clinical prescriptions. Where a study is registered or in preparation, no effect estimates are claimed; outcomes are reported only on completion and peer review. Data summaries are aggregated and non-identifiable. Do not cite non-peer-reviewed abstracts as established clinical evidence. Each entry is explicitly labelled by stage. The Open Abstract Library exists to encourage academic dialogue and transparency — not to bypass rigorous review.
Twelve Structured Abstracts
Spanning gait mechanics, spine load science, clinical movement dysfunction, performance biomechanics, rehabilitation translation, fascial mechanics, AI-driven assessment, and the nutrition-biomechanics interface. All entries follow an IMRAD-aligned structured abstract format and are labelled by development stage.
Localised fatigue alters biomechanical strategies during locomotion in ways that are not fully captured by global kinematic descriptors. Plantar pressure distribution is a clinically accessible proxy for load-transfer behaviour across the foot-ground interface, yet fatigue-driven adaptations in regional peak pressures during barefoot running remain poorly characterised. The absence of footwear eliminates the confound of sole geometry, making barefoot conditions a mechanistically cleaner model for studying intrinsic foot loading adaptation.
To quantify region-specific changes in peak plantar pressure across heel, midfoot, and forefoot contact zones during barefoot running following a standardised controlled-fatigue protocol; to determine whether fatigue-driven load redistribution follows predictable directional patterns consistent with GRF-mediated compensation strategies.
Repeated-measures within-subjects design. Controlled fatigue protocol applied prior to each running trial using standardised treadmill loading sufficient to produce measurable perceived exertion elevation (RPE ≥6). Plantar pressures measured using validated pressure insoles at matched running velocity across pre- and post-fatigue conditions. Outcome metrics: peak regional pressure (kPa), contact area (cm²), pressure-time integral per region. Statistical analysis: paired t-tests with Bonferroni correction; effect sizes (Cohen's d) reported on completion.
Analysis in progress. Pre-specified outcomes are the region-specific change in peak plantar pressure, contact area, and pressure-time integral from pre- to post-fatigue. The working hypothesis is a fatigue-driven shift in load emphasis consistent with disruption of normal proximal-to-distal load sequencing. Effect estimates are reported on completion; no values are claimed at this stage.
If confirmed, region-specific fatigue effects on plantar load would have direct implications for overuse-injury risk and running economy under prolonged conditions, and for the design of fatigue-sensitive training-volume prescription. Manuscript in development; full dataset available for institutional collaboration on completion.
Current clinical and coaching models of squat assessment are dominated by anatomical and positional descriptors — knee tracking, torso angle, lumbar position — that fail to capture force transmission efficiency, constraint-driven movement organisation, or adaptive strategy selection under progressive load. These positional frameworks treat movement faults as isolated targets rather than emergent consequences of upstream mechanical organisation, leading to corrective interventions that address symptoms rather than sources.
To propose a system-level biomechanical framework for squat assessment that prioritises force-transmission efficiency, proximal stability, and constraint-driven movement organisation over isolated positional criteria; to establish corrective sequencing logic grounded in kinematic-kinetic integration principles rather than surface observation alone.
Conceptual framework development grounded in published biomechanical literature on squat mechanics, GRF-to-segment force translation, intra-abdominal pressure, hip-knee kinematic coupling, and lumbopelvic rhythm. Joint-by-joint analysis applied systematically across squat phases. Clinical decision logic derived from load-path modelling, movement confidence theory, and kinematic-kinetic integration principles.
A multi-level decision framework was constructed identifying primary mechanical drivers (proximal stability, pelvic control, IAP management), secondary resultant behaviours (knee mechanics, femoral rotation), and corrective sequencing logic from proximal-to-distal. Movement patterns are classified as adaptive strategies under constraint rather than isolated faults. The framework differentiates mobility-limited, stability-limited, and load-strategy-limited squat presentations with specific corrective pathways for each.
Reframing the squat as a diagnostic stress test for load-transfer efficiency — rather than a form-matching exercise against a normative template — supports improved clinical reasoning in assessment, correction sequencing, and load progression across rehabilitation and performance contexts. The framework is embedded within the BPIT 5-Line Principle as the mechanical logic governing Line 3 (Standing) and Line 4 (Head-Level) loading decisions.
Bilateral asymmetry in barbell squatting is typically framed as a correctable technical error in both coaching and rehabilitation literature. However, ground reaction force and three-dimensional kinematic data suggest that asymmetry may represent a protective load-management or compensatory strategy under increasing load rather than an isolated fault. The mechanisms by which asymmetry emerges, escalates, and stabilises under progressive loading have not been systematically characterised.
To evaluate unilateral load bias and asymmetrical GRF distribution during barbell squatting; to determine whether GRF asymmetry escalates with progressive loading in a predictable, directional manner; and to characterise the biomechanical phenomenon of asymmetric loading as a hidden single-leg dominance pattern.
Applied biomechanics analysis using dual force-plate GRF data and 3D kinematic capture. Outcome metrics: inter-limb GRF ratio, pelvic rotation angle (degrees), limb dominance index (LDI), and peak vertical GRF asymmetry coefficient across four progressive load conditions. Participants drawn from a training-experienced population. Statistical analysis: repeated-measures ANOVA; linear mixed-effects modelling for load-dependent asymmetry escalation.
Under internal review. The construct under evaluation — termed the “hidden single-leg squat” — is defined a priori as a sustained inter-limb GRF asymmetry across consecutive repetitions. Pre-specified questions are whether asymmetry amplifies with load and whether its direction is stable within individuals. Effect estimates are reported on completion of review; no values are claimed at this stage.
If asymmetry is confirmed as a measurable, directionally stable, load-sensitive phenomenon, corrective strategies targeting surface positional asymmetry without addressing root mechanical drivers — hip-capsule constraint, proximal stability deficits, or dominance-pattern entrainment — are unlikely to produce durable change under load. These questions inform BPIT regression decisions and the MMSx-SCAN™ Pelvic Control domain scoring criteria.
Knee abduction cues (“push knees out”) are ubiquitous in strength and rehabilitation coaching as an assumed protective strategy against knee valgus. Despite prevalence, the biomechanical consequences of forced maximal abduction — as opposed to functional lateral tracking — have not been systematically evaluated using integrated GRF and kinematic analysis across multiple load levels.
To evaluate load-path efficiency, squat depth mechanics, and shear demand changes associated with forced maximal knee abduction cueing during squatting; to compare neutral versus maximally forced abduction conditions across kinematics, GRF, and depth metrics in a multi-centre observational cohort.
Multi-centre observational analysis across GFFI, BodyGNTX, IIKBS, and AIHFT research sites. Neutral knee-tracking versus forced maximal abduction compared across 3D kinematic measures, vertical and horizontal GRF, squat depth (hip crease-to-knee angle at terminal flexion), and foot-tripod stability index. Training-background stratification: general population, recreational, competitive athlete. Statistical analysis: mixed-effects ANOVA; pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction.
Analysis in progress. Pre-specified outcomes are load-path efficiency, terminal-flexion range, anterior shear demand, and foot-tripod contact area under neutral versus forced maximal abduction. The working hypothesis is that forced maximal abduction compromises load-path efficiency relative to functional lateral tracking, particularly under higher relative loads. Effect estimates are reported on completion; no values are claimed at this stage.
The analysis is designed to test whether context-sensitive lateral knee tracking is preferable to maximal forced abduction cueing under load. The intended clinical target is functional knee tracking within the foot-to-hip mechanical corridor rather than maximal abduction. Findings will inform BPIT protocol SOP guidance and MMSx-SCAN™ Knee Control domain scoring logic.
Hypertrophic adaptation is the dominant model for strength performance improvement, with cross-sectional area widely used as a surrogate for force-production capacity. However, neural drive efficiency — encompassing motor unit recruitment thresholds, discharge rate behaviour, and neural drive frequency — may explain a substantial proportion of between-individual performance differentiation that hypertrophy models cannot account for. The specific neural strategies that differentiate strength-dominant from explosively-trained athletes under progressive load remain insufficiently characterised.
To characterise motor unit recruitment thresholds and rate-coding strategies in strength-dominant versus explosively-trained athletes during progressive isometric loading; to determine whether neural efficiency metrics provide performance differentiation beyond what is captured by cross-sectional area and standard EMG amplitude.
Cross-sectional comparative design across strength-dominant athletes, explosively-trained athletes, and recreationally-trained controls. Surface EMG recorded at VL, RF, and GM during progressive isometric contraction from 30% to 90% MVIC. EMG normalised to maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC). Rate-coding analysis: discharge rate variability, motor unit recruitment threshold tracking. Between-group comparisons: one-way ANOVA; pairwise comparisons with effect sizes (Hedges' g).
Analysis in progress. Pre-specified comparisons are recruitment-onset threshold, discharge-rate capacity, and rate-coding behaviour across the three groups, evaluated for independence from measured cross-sectional area. The working hypothesis is that neural efficiency is a distinct adaptive construct not fully explained by hypertrophy. Effect estimates are reported on completion; no values are claimed at this stage.
If neural efficiency metrics differentiate athlete populations beyond hypertrophic adaptation, standard EMG amplitude alone would be insufficient as a performance or rehabilitation-readiness indicator. The work is designed to inform the inclusion of rate-coding assessment in return-to-sport evaluation and the BPIT 5-Line progression logic at Lines 4–5, where neural drive under high-velocity loading becomes the primary limiting variable.
Binary movement screening tools (FMS, SFMA) produce single ordinal scores without population-stratified normative references or biomechanical domain stratification sufficient for staged clinical decision-making. The absence of a multidimensional movement-intelligence tool with open normative datasets represents a gap in applied biomechanics practice, particularly for rehabilitation-to-performance transition contexts.
To describe the architecture, domain structure, scoring logic, and clinical application of MMSx-SCAN™ v2.1; to evaluate inter-rater reliability across the seven biomechanical domains and the composite Movement Intelligence Index (MII, 0–100); and to derive population-stratified normative reference tables from the deposited cohort dataset.
Framework development grounded in biomechanical evidence across seven orthogonal assessment domains: Spinal Control, Pelvic Control, Hip Mechanics, Knee Control, Ankle-Foot Interface, Upper Kinetic Chain, and Breathing-Core Integration (plus an Asymmetry Index). Inter-rater reliability is evaluated via ICC(2,1) across independent MMSx-trained raters; normative MII percentile tables are derived stratified by training background, age group, and gender. Prescription protocol logic is defined across four framework pathways (BPIT, NEEBAL, MOVE, HYBRID).
Reliability and normative analysis in progress. The assessment dataset is openly deposited on OSF. Inter-rater reliability (ICC, SEM, MDC₃₅), normative MII percentile tables, and prescription-pathway agreement are pre-specified outputs reported on completion. No reliability coefficients or normative values are claimed at this stage.
MMSx-SCAN™ v2.1 is designed to provide an open normative reference dataset for a multidimensional movement-assessment tool and a structured prescription-logic pathway that aligns assessment with intervention frameworks. Multi-site registry validation is ongoing (MMSx-STU-005, open enrolment). The live tool is available at TrainersEye.
Balanced Progressive Intensity Training (BPIT™) organises strength and movement exercises into five biomechanically defined intensity lines (Ground-Based, Knee-Level, Standing, Head-Level, Plyometric), each defined by GRF characteristic, neuromuscular demand profile, and target HR zone. The framework is proposed as a resolution to the training-injury paradox through mechanically gated intensity progression, evaluated across a registered pilot and a registered multi-site study.
To evaluate the BPIT 5-Line Principle across a registered pilot (NCT07296640) and a registered multi-site cohort (NCT07256717) for effects on Movement Efficiency Score (MES), Range of Motion, Strength Index, HRV (RMSSD), and knee valgus angle.
Pilot: prospective single-site interventional (NCT07296640). Multi-cohort: multi-site prospective interventional (NCT07256717) across BodyGNTX, GFFI India, IIKBS, AIHFT, and BFS-approved sites. Protocol: 5-week BPIT v3.3 (40-minute sessions, 5 days/week, Lines 1–5 progressive exposure). Primary outcomes: MES (0–10 BPIT Observation Scale), ROM (goniometer), Strength Index (Rep × Load), HRV RMSSD, VAS pain, knee valgus angle (video analysis). Statistics: paired t-tests, Cohen's d, mixed-effects modelling for site effects.
Registered; results pending. Pre-specified outcomes (MES, ROM, Strength Index, HRV RMSSD, VAS pain, knee valgus angle, adherence, and adverse events) are reported on completion and peer review. No effect estimates, adherence figures, or injury rates are claimed at this stage.
The studies are designed to test the governing premise that mechanically gated progression can support concurrent strength improvement and injury-risk reduction — a pattern conventional progressive-overload frameworks predict cannot coexist. Conclusions follow only from completed, peer-reviewed analysis.
The MOVE Protocol (Movement-Oriented Velocity of Engagement) was developed in response to the clinical inadequacy of stage-restricted rehabilitation frameworks that sequence recovery by arbitrary time criteria rather than demonstrated movement-quality thresholds. The protocol introduces four mechanistically defined rehabilitation phases: (M) Mobilize Early, (O) Optimize Load, (V) Validate Neural Control, and (E) Elevate Performance — each gated by objective movement-quality benchmarks rather than time elapsed.
To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and return-to-activity outcomes of the MOVE Protocol (NCT07220200) in adults with musculoskeletal injury or dysfunction across a multi-site interventional case series, with a matched comparison against standard care.
Multi-site interventional case series (planned n=40) with matched comparison against a standard-care arm. Delivered by MMSx-certified movement specialists and sports physiotherapists across GFFI, IIKBS, and AIHFT sites. Phase progression gated by: pain NRS ≤3/10, a <24hr flare rule, and demonstrated movement control without compensation. Primary outcomes: return-to-activity time (weeks), NRS pain, AROM, functional movement-quality score. Statistics: paired t-tests; Mann-Whitney U for between-arm comparison.
Registered; results pending. Pre-specified outcomes (return-to-activity time, NRS pain, AROM, functional movement-quality score, and adverse events) are reported on completion and peer review. No effect estimates are claimed at this stage.
The study is designed to test whether movement-quality-gated progression offers a more mechanistically sound rehabilitation philosophy than time-gated or symptom-driven frameworks. Conclusions follow only from completed, peer-reviewed analysis. The protocol is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT07220200).
Fatigue-related injury-risk elevation is well-documented in the epidemiological literature but mechanistically underspecified. Existing models treat fatigue as a force-reduction phenomenon without characterising how it reorganises the spatial and temporal structure of kinetic chain coordination. The absence of a mechanistic cascade model leaves clinicians and coaches without a systematic framework for identifying where in the kinetic chain fatigue first compromises load-transfer integrity and how that compromise propagates distally.
To propose and justify the Fatigue-Induced Kinetic Chain Cascade (FIKCC) as a three-stage mechanistic model describing the sequential breakdown of kinetic chain coordination under fatigue; to identify clinical monitoring indicators for each stage; and to specify the Compensatory Stiffness Paradox as a construct within Stage I mechanics.
Conceptual framework development grounded in evidence synthesis across trunk biomechanics, neuromuscular fatigue, kinetic chain coupling, and GRF-redistribution literature. Three-stage cascade architecture defined via: (1) proximal reserve loss mechanics, (2) coordination breakdown kinetics, (3) distal compensation modelling. Framework falsifiability conditions and monitoring logic specified per stage; integrative synthesis methodology.
FIKCC: Stage I (Proximal Reserve Loss) — reduced trunk stiffness produces “hidden vulnerability” while function is maintained through compensatory mechanisms; the Compensatory Stiffness Paradox is identified (preserved function conceals escalating injury risk). Stage II (Coordination Breakdown) — pelvic contribution to load transfer diminishes; thoracolumbar compensatory demand increases; spinal loading shifts toward shear-dominant orientation. Stage III (Distal Compensation) — peripheral joints become final recipients of chain failure; distal overload risk escalates non-linearly. The cascade is proposed as a reorganisation of mechanics, not merely force reduction.
FIKCC provides a mechanistically specified three-stage model of fatigue-induced kinetic chain coordination breakdown. The framework reframes fatigue-risk assessment from load monitoring to coordination monitoring, with Stage I–III indicators that can be integrated into session design, fatigue traffic-light protocols (as in BPIT SOP), and return-to-sport readiness assessment. The Compensatory Stiffness Paradox has direct implications for when to reduce loading — before performance degradation becomes visible. Published in JMMBS Vol.3 Issue 1, 2026.
Machine learning models for injury-risk prediction in biomechanics have achieved acceptable discriminative accuracy but remain largely opaque in clinical terms — unable to identify which kinematic or temporal features drove a given prediction. This black-box limitation restricts clinical adoption, as practitioners require interpretable, actionable feature attribution rather than binary risk scores. SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) offers a theoretically grounded approach to post-hoc explainability in biomechanical ML pipelines.
To develop and validate an explainable AI pipeline integrating markerless pose estimation with SHAP-driven injury-risk feature attribution; to identify the biomechanical features with highest SHAP contribution to injury-risk classification; and to evaluate whether XAI output is interpretable and actionable by movement professionals without machine learning expertise.
Markerless pose estimation pipeline using TrainersEye Motion Pro. Feature extraction: joint angle time-series, GRF proxy metrics, and temporal asymmetry indices across squat, deadlift, and landing tasks. Classification model: gradient boosted tree (XGBoost). SHAP explainability layer applied post-prediction. Outputs: SHAP value distribution per kinematic feature; beeswarm and waterfall plots per prediction. Clinical interpretability assessed via expert-panel rating.
Preliminary development; validation pending. Early work identifies trunk lateral displacement, knee valgus impulse, and hip-loading asymmetry as candidate high-attribution features. Classification performance, false-positive behaviour, and clinician-interpretability ratings are reported on completion of the validation cohort; no performance figures are claimed at this stage.
Explainable AI integration with markerless biomechanical assessment is intended to provide a clinically viable pathway to AI-assisted injury-risk screening that is interpretable by practitioners, actionable in session planning, and grounded in identifiable kinematic mechanisms. This work underpins the MMSx Authority AI stream (RS-007) and informs the TrainersEye MoPro and Motion Map tools.
Conventional biomechanics models treat muscle force production and joint mechanics as the primary determinants of movement capacity. Fascial anatomy research has progressively demonstrated that myofascial lines — continuous connective tissue networks spanning multiple segments — function as a major force-transmission architecture in the human body. The integration of fascial tensegrity principles with kinematic and GRF analysis remains underdeveloped as a clinical assessment and corrective framework.
To construct a comprehensive 24-chapter monograph series establishing myofascial line-driven movement architecture as a clinical and scientific framework; to reframe movement failure as primarily a sequencing and load-transfer problem mediated by fascial tension distribution rather than isolated muscle weakness; and to integrate tensegrity mechanics with applied biomechanics assessment practice.
Systematic integrative review of fascial anatomy, myofascial line mechanics (Anatomy Trains framework), tensegrity models of skeletal support, and their intersection with GRF biomechanics, kinematic assessment, and clinical movement correction. Each of the 24 chapters addresses a distinct myofascial line or mechanistic concept, with synthesis against published EMG and ultrasound imaging data on fascial force transmission.
24-chapter structure covering: Superficial Back Line, Superficial Front Line, Lateral Line, Spiral Line, Arm Lines (×4), Functional Lines (×2), Deep Front Line, myofascial-to-GRF coupling models, tensegrity and pre-tension mechanics, fascia-mediated load-transfer failure patterns, and clinical corrective sequencing from a myofascial-line perspective. Chapter pre-releases are planned for Zenodo archiving as the series develops.
The completed monograph series is intended to integrate fascial tensegrity mechanics with applied movement assessment and clinical correction practice, providing the scientific foundation for the MMSx Authority RS-006 research stream and informing fascial-line-integrated assessment criteria within a future MMSx-SCAN™ revision. Target completion: Q4 2026.
The bench press is one of the most globally performed resistance exercises across strength, powerlifting, rehabilitation, and recreational training contexts. Despite its prevalence, there is no published systematic review synthesising bench press biomechanics from a coaching-applicable and clinically actionable framework perspective. Existing reviews address narrow technical questions (grip width, bar path, shoulder position) in isolation without integrating findings into a coherent assessment and prescription framework.
To conduct a PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review of bench press biomechanics literature, synthesising findings on bar-path mechanics, joint moment demands, scapular control, shoulder capsule load-management, and leg-drive contributions; to derive an evidence-grounded bench press coaching and assessment framework for practitioner application.
PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review. Electronic database search: PubMed, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Google Scholar. Search terms: bench press AND biomechanics / kinematics / kinetics / EMG / injury. Inclusion: peer-reviewed English-language studies reporting biomechanical measurements of the bench press. Exclusion: reviews without primary data; training-intervention studies without biomechanical measurement. Quality assessment: modified Downs & Black checklist. Data synthesis: narrative with tabulated evidence summary.
Screening and synthesis in progress. Key synthesis domains: bar-path optimisation, grip-width biomechanics, shoulder internal rotation and capsule loading, scapular retraction and serratus anterior demands, arch mechanics and thoracic extension, leg-drive GRF contributions, fatigue-induced technique breakdown. Final included-study count and the PRISMA flow diagram are reported on completion.
The BOST systematic review is intended to produce an evidence-grounded bench press biomechanics framework for practitioner implementation across strength, rehabilitation, and return-to-sport contexts. Findings will inform BPIT Line 2 (Knee-Level / Supported) protocol guidance and MMSx Authority coach-education curricula. Target journal: JMMBS or external peer-reviewed submission. The PRISMA checklist will be published alongside the full paper on completion.
For manuscripts listed as in preparation, under review, registered, or in development — full document access may be granted to verified researchers, clinicians, and academic institutions on completion. Please provide your institutional affiliation, ORCID (if available), and intended use. All requests are reviewed by the MMSx Authority Research Office.