Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:6694365rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0022742lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:6694365lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0175649lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:6694365lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0220825lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:6694365lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0699733lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:6694365lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C2587213lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:6694365lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0439858lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:issue1lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:dateCreated1984-3-23lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:abstractTextAn objective evaluation of an experimental adaptive controlled knee, using kinematic, ground reactions and time/distance data was carried out. The comparison of amputee's walking with the experimental and the normal prosthesis was based on five parameters, representing the main walking pattern criteria. Significant differences were detected, in favour of the adaptive controlled knee, i.e. improvement in hip moment peaks (50%), hip muscular effort (37%), reduced need for compensatory movements, and improved symmetry.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:monthJanlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:issn0141-5425lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:authorpubmed-author:BarAAlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:authorpubmed-author:IshaiGGlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:volume6lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:pagination27-32lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:dateRevised2007-11-15lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:6694365-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:6694365-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:6694365-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:6694365-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:6694365-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:6694365-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:6694365-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:6694365-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:year1984lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:articleTitleEvaluation of AK prostheses comparing conventional with adaptive knee control devices.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:publicationTypeComparative Studylld:pubmed
pubmed-article:6694365pubmed:publicationTypeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tlld:pubmed