Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
There is not any method to measure metatarsal protrusion in the whole metatarsal. The aim of this research is to know the normal metatarsal parabola in male and female feet. The system of measurement devised by Hardy and Clapham to evaluate the protrusion between metatarsals I and II was adapted to study the whole metatarsal parabola and applied to the five metatarsals of 169 normal feet, 72 female feet and 97 male feet. Authors measured all metatarsal protrusion relative to metatarsal II. The results obtained show a female metatarsal protrusion relative to metatarsal II of +1.27% for metatarsal I, -3.36% for metatarsal III, -8.34% for metatarsal IV, and -15.54% for metatarsal V. Data obtained for male metatarsal parabola were +0.5% for metatarsal I, -3.77 for metatarsal III, -9.57 for metatarsal IV, and -17.05 for metatarsal V. Differences between both metatarsal parabola were significant.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3932714 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/505736 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!