The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The longitudinal arch. A survey of eight hundred and eighty-two feet in normal children and adults
Abstract
Both feet of 441 normal subjects, who ranged in age from one to eighty years, were studied to document the configuration of the longitudinal arch. The findings showed that flat feet are usual in infants, common in children, and within the normal range of the observations made in adult feet. Documentation and observation is the recommended management of the flexible flat foot that falls within the normal range.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Flexible flatfoot in children and adolescents
Mosca, V. S. (2010) · Journal of Children's Orthopaedics · doi:10.1007/s11832-010-0239-9 · Cited by 353
Age-related differences in foot structure and function
Scott, G., Menz, H. B., & Newcombe, L. (2007) · Gait & Posture · doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.07.009 · Cited by 349
Flexibility does not affect the dorsiflexion of foot and the popliteal angle in young adults
Pietrzak, K., Nowocień, K., & Kraszewski, B. (2020) · Foot and Ankle Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.fas.2019.09.007 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Venue
- The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
- Published
- 1987-03
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 426-428
- ISSN
- 0021-9355 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W202557807
- Cited by
- 494
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The longitudinal arch. A survey of eight hundred and eighty-two feet in normal children and adults. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2106/00004623-198769030-00014
- The paper
- The longitudinal arch. A survey of eight hundred and eighty-two feet in normal children and adults. (1987). The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-198769030-00014
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
