The research behind movement measurement.
Selected studies on trunk control, rehabilitation, and return-to-sport assessment that inform the questions we are working to answer.
Four perspectives on movement assessment
Explore the published research informing our approach.
Nobody agrees what recovered means.
Return-to-sport testing has no shared standard. Ask 1,154 clinicians in 78 countries how they clear an athlete and you get 157 different combinations of tests. Almost everyone uses multiple devices, averaging 3.6 of them. Fewer than half test against defined criteria at all.
The core is where the answer lives.
Core stability is not a posture. It is the ability to control the trunk over the pelvis while force transfers out to the limbs, which means it has to be judged dynamically, in three planes. And it is not academic: core capacity measured before a season predicts who gets injured during it.
Where the trunk goes, the knee pays.
Constrain the trunk during a cut and knee energy absorption jumps by roughly a quarter. Train an athlete to cut faster and the same braking mechanics that buy the speed also drive the knee abduction moment. Performance and risk share a mechanism, so watching one without the other is guesswork. Trunk control is also trainable, which is what makes measuring it useful rather than merely interesting.
Movement data can inform assessment.
The papers below examine return-to-performance recommendations and movement-based classification after ACL reconstruction. Their findings raise questions for product research. The classification result belongs to a study combining biomechanical and EMG data; it is not a CoreMotion result.
Papers are provided for reference and remain the copyright of their respective publishers. Links open the full PDF.