Exploring the bidirectional relationship between localized musculoskeletal pain and gait abnormalities: a Mendelian randomization study
=======================================================================================================================================

* Xiaoming Xie
* Kuayue Zhang
* Xinyi Li
* Yi Lin
* Liangqing Huang
* Guihua Tian

## Abstract

**Background** Abnormal gait will alter lower extremity joint mechanics load-bearing patterns, accelerate the osteoarticular disease process, trigger new oste-oarticular complications, and bring about multiple mobility impairments; scientific pain management strategies can help with walking training and rehabilitation exercises. However, studies to date on the relationship between localized musculoskeletal pain and gait abnormalities have not reached definitive conclusions.

**Purpose** To investigate the bidirectional causal relationship between localized musculoskeletal pain and gait abnormalities.

**Methods** The independent single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) loci strongly associated with pain were extracted as instrumental variables (IVs) from Genome-wide association study (GWAS) data of localized musculoskeletal pain according to preset thresholds, and Inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method was used to assess the association between pain-related phenotypes and gait abnormalities; the Cochran Q test was used to assess the heterogeneity of the SNPs.

**Results** Low back pain (OR=1.53, 95%CI=1.058∼2.219, P=0.023) and hip pain (OR=1.55, 95%CI=1.067∼2.252, P=0.021) were significantly genetically predisposed to gait abnormalities, but knee pain (OR=2.15, 95%CI=0.234∼19.789, P=0.498) was not significantly genetically susceptible to gait abnormalities. None of the results of the reverse MR analysis supported reverse causality. The Cochran Q test showed no heterogeneity among the SNPs.

**Conclusions** This study suggests a robust correlation, gait abnormalities are related to low back pain and hip pain. Our findings contribute to a deeper comprehension of the intricate interplay between localized musculoskeletal pain and gait abnormalities, emphasizing the importance of employing tailored strategies to alleviate localized musculoskeletal pain.

Key words
*   Mendelian Randomization
*   Localized Musculoskeletal Pain
*   Gait Abnormalities
*   Bidirectional Causality

## Introduction

Gait abnormalities can stem from motor or sensory impairments, their features contingent upon the location of pathology. Specific abnormal gaits can serve as diagnostic clues for particular diseases. Particularly in musculoskeletal disorders, gait abnormalities manifest with heightened distinctiveness[1][2][3]. Studies have shown that long-term gait abnormalities can aggravate the condition of patients with osteoarthritis (OA)[4], gait abnormalities can cause instability in the motor joints, and joint injuries are aggravated by joint activities, which in turn cause pain, gradual muscle atrophy, and more pronounced muscle strength loss, and so on in a vicious circle. This vicious cycle leads to the gradual aggravation of pain and dysfunction in musculoskeletal disorders patients[4]. Therefore, analyzing the association between gait abnormalities and diseases will help clinicians in scientifically and precisely discerning disease etiology, diagnosing conditions, assessing treatment effectiveness, and guiding patients’ walking rehabilitation programs[6][7].

Mendelian randomization (MR) is an epidemiological method designed to overcome the limitations of observational studies and has been universally used in several studies. The MR aims to make full use of independent single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) loci as instrumental variables (IVs) to infer causal relationships between exposure factors and outcomes[8]. This method can effectively avoid the effects of confounders, measurement error, and reverse causality that are typical of observational studies, and yield more plausible findings. The primary objective of this study was to perform bidirectional Mendelian randomization analysis of self-reported data from the Genome-wide association study (GWAS) data on localized musculoskeletal pain and gait abnormalities conducted in the openGWAS database, to deepen the understanding of the complex interactions between localized musculoskeletal pain and gait abnormalities and thereby informing more effective interventions[9].

## 1 Information and methodology

### 1.1 Rationale

The basic steps of MR study include obtaining GWAS summary data, screening and evaluating SNPs, conducting statistical analysis, and implementing quality control measures. As shown in Fig. 1, the accuracy of the MR analysis is based on the fulfillment of three crucial assumptions[10][11]. Exposure factors and outcome variables will be interchanged in each analysis to determine if reverse causality exists between the two.

![Fig. 1](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/08/19/2024.08.18.24312194/F1.medium.gif)

[Fig. 1](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/08/19/2024.08.18.24312194/F1)

Fig. 1 
Steps of this Mendelian randomization analysis

### 1.2 Data sources

Data related to low back pain, hip pain, and knee pain are obtained from the IEU openGWAS database, and the wsbsitie is:[https://gwas.mrcieu.ac.uk/](https://gwas.mrcieu.ac.uk/). Specific questions used to define these conditions can be found in Supplementary file 1. The low back pain dataset GWAS ID number is: ebi-a-GCST90018797, which includes 22,413 patients with low back pain, and 445,856 controls in the population. The hip pain dataset GWAS ID number is: ebi-a-GCST90013968. The knee pain dataset GWAS ID number is: ukb-b-16254, which includes 98,704 patients with knee pain, as well as a control population of 363,153. GWAS data for gait abnormalities is also obtained from the IEU openGWAS database, and the ID number is: finn-b-R18\_ABNORMALITI\_GAIT_MOBIL, including 1,348 cases of gait abnormalities and 209,369 control populations. Details are shown in Table. 1. In the corresponding original GWAS, all participants provided written informed consent, and the authors had no access to information that could identify individual participants during or after data collection.

View this table:
[Table. 1](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/08/19/2024.08.18.24312194/T1)

Table. 1 The information from the GWAS database in the MR analysis

### 1.3 Screening and entry of SNPs

Firstly, we performed correlation setting and extracted SNPs significantly associated with exposure from the GWAS summary database as IVs using P < 5×10−8 as the screening condition, and when the number of SNPs obtained from screening is less than 2, the parameter can be appropriately relaxed to *P* < 5 × 10−6; next, we set the independence setting, and excluded the interference of linkage disequilibrium by setting the parameters of r2 < 0.001 and kb = 10000 to ensure the independence of IVs; the strength of IVs was assessed using the F statistic, F = [(N-k-1)/k] × [R2 /(1-R2)][12], and only when the F statistic > 10 so that the SNPs could be included in the study. SNPs associated with confounders were sought and removed using the PhenoScanner V2 website ([http://www.phenoscanner.medschl.cam.ac.uk/](http://www.phenoscanner.medschl.cam.ac.uk/)), and data for exposure and outcome were corrected in the same direction to remove SNPs with palindromic structures[13].

### 1.4 Statistical analysis

The causal effects between exposure and outcome variables were estimated in this study using five methods: the IVW method, the MR-Egger regression method, the weighted median method, the weighted mode method, and the simple mode method[14].The IVW method is considered the standard method for MR analysis, which assumes that all instrumental variables are valid, and is based on the principle of combining the Wald ratio estimates. The MR-Egger regression method detects potential multicollinearity and takes into account the presence of an intercept term in the regression[15][16].

### 1.5 Quality control

First, Cochran Q test was used to assess the heterogeneity of SNPs, if Cochran Q test was statistically significant then it indicated that there was a significant heterogeneity in the analyzed results[17]. Second, Mendelian randomization pleiotropy residual sum and outlier (MR-PRESSO) was applied to search for the presence of outlier SNPs in the results, and if they existed, they were eliminated and reanalyzed[18]. Third, the “leave-one-out” method was applied to test the robustness of the results, and the combined effect of the remaining SNPs was calculated by excluding SNPs one by one to assess the effect of individual SNPs on the association between exposure and outcome variables[19]. The MR analysis and quality control were performed using the R language version 4.3.2 and the “Two Sample MR” software packages version 0.5.8.

## 2 Results

GWAS data for 3 types of localized musculoskeletal pain (including low back pain, hip pain, and knee pain) and 1 type of gait abnormality were analyzed in this study. Detailed information on IVs for each exposure factor can be found in Supplementary file 2.

### 2.1 MR analysis of localized musculoskeletal pain on gait abnormalities

The F-statistics of all SNPs were greater than 10 (20.86-91.68), indicating a low likelihood of weak instrumental bias. The results showed that the susceptibility to low back pain and hip pain was significantly associated with the risk of gait abnormalities.IVW results showed that low back pain (OR=1.53, 95%CI=1.058-2.219, P=0.023) and hip pain (OR=1.55, 95%CI=1.067-2.252, P=0.021) increased the risk of gait abnormalities. However, susceptibility to knee pain was not significantly associated with the risk of gait abnormalities, and the available results do not support the conclusion that knee pain (OR=2.15, 95%CI=0.234-19.789, P=0.498) can increase the risk of developing gait abnormalities (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Fig. 4). Detailed MR results and scatter plots of localized musculoskeletal pain on the risk of gait abnormalities are provided in Supplementary file 3.

![Fig. 2.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/08/19/2024.08.18.24312194/F2.medium.gif)

[Fig. 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/08/19/2024.08.18.24312194/F2)

Fig. 2. 

![Fig. 3.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/08/19/2024.08.18.24312194/F3.medium.gif)

[Fig. 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/08/19/2024.08.18.24312194/F3)

Fig. 3. 

![Fig. 4.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/08/19/2024.08.18.24312194/F4.medium.gif)

[Fig. 4.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/08/19/2024.08.18.24312194/F4)

Fig. 4. 

Scatter plots for the causal relationship between localized musculoskeletal pain and gait abnormalities. Fig. 2 a Scatter plot for the causal relationship of low back pain on gait abnormalities; Fig. 3 b Scatter plot for the causal relationship of hip pain on gait abnormalities; Fig. 4 c Scatter plot for the causal relationship of knee pain on gait abnormalities.SNP: Single nucleotide polymorphism.

The results of the five MR statistical methods were shown in Table. 2, and in the MR analysis of low back pain and hip pain on gait abnormalities, except for the IVW method, the results of the remaining four methods were not significant, but according to the OR values and as shown in the scatter plots in Supplementary file 3, the total effect sizes of all methods were in the same direction. In contrast, in the MR analysis of knee pain on gait abnormalities, the results of all five statistical methods were not significant.

View this table:
[Table. 2](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/08/19/2024.08.18.24312194/T2)

Table. 2 The results of the five MR methods

### 2.2 MR analysis of gait abnormalities on localized musculoskeletal pain

A total of four SNPs were finally included as instrumental variables for MR analysis, and the F-statistics of all SNPs were greater than 10 (20.87-22.68), indicating the presence of a weak instrumental bias was less likely.

Reverse MR analysis showed no significant causal relationship between gait abnormalities and localized musculoskeletal pain, and IVW results showed that gait abnormalities did not increase the risk of low back pain (OR=0.999, 95%CI=0.952 - 1.047, P=0.951), hip pain (OR=1.001, 95%CI=0.969-1.034, P=0.961), and knee pain (OR=1.000, 95%CI=0.996-1.005, P=0.872). For detailed MR results and scatter plots of the risk of gait abnormalities on localized musculoskeletal pain, please see Supplementary file 4.

### 2.3 Quality control and sensitivity analysis

The Cochran Q test results showed no heterogeneity among the SNPs included in the analysis; the MR-Egger intercept test results showed no horizontal pleiotropy in the MR analysis results, and the heterogeneity and horizontal pleiotropy among the genetic tools are described in Supplementary file 5. The “leave-one-out” sensitivity analysis showed that the overall error line did not change much and that the causal estimates were unlikely to be affected by some SNP effects, and more detailed information was shown in the Supplementary file 6. The MR-PRESSO results showed that no outlier SNPs were detected. The funnel plots and forest plots of the present MR analysis were shown in Supplementary file 7 and Supplementary file 8.

## 3 Discussion

Gait abnormalities will change the mechanical bearing pattern of lower limb joints, accelerate the process of osteoarthritic diseases, trigger new osteoarthritic complications, and bring about a variety of activity disorders, which has greatly affected patients’ quality of life and gradually attracted people’s attention. Some studies have reported that localized musculoskeletal pain is a risk factor for gait abnormalities, and in a cross-sectional study of healthy nondisabled volunteers aged 65 years and older, researchers found that multisite pain were associated with slow gait speed (n=176)[20]. However, the causal relationship between localized musculoskeletal pain and gait abnormalities has not been definitively explained due to the limitations of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the real world, which limits the clinical pain management.

Several recent studies have utilized MR to explore risk or protective factors for localized musculoskeletal pain[21][22][23]. MR provides a pioneering approach to exploring the causal relationship between risk factors and disease outcomes, making it a useful tool for making causal inferences in cases where a RCT is not feasible or unethical[24]. For this, in this study, the method of bidirectional MR analysis was used, and three types of localized musculoskeletal pain and one type of gait abnormality were selected as exposure and outcome indicators. This is the first time that MR have been used to explore the relationship between localized musculoskeletal pain and gait abnormalities. We hope that our findings will help clinical practitioners educate patients with gait abnormalities about targeted pain management**Error! Reference source not found**.

Our results suggested that localized musculoskeletal pain, especially low back pain and hip pain, could increase the risk of gait abnormality, but gait abnormality did not have a significant causal effect on the occurrence of localized musculoskeletal pain. Take low back pain as an example, it has been demonstrated that patients with low back pain exhibit altered movement patterns and control strategies during daily functional activities, patients with low back pain have a slowed gait speed and reduced stride length, and when patients with low back pain are asked to stride faster they only exhibit an increased stride frequency and an asymmetric stride length[27]. In another population-based study of non-disabled older adults, researchers found that the presence of two lower body pain sites was associated with slower gait speed[27]. Our results further validated the relationship between localized musculoskeletal pain and gait characteristics.

Pain-induced decline in gait performance may be associated with two mechanisms: firstly, motor control mechanisms. The idea that pain and motor dysfunction interact with each other has been proposed from the perspective of motor control in patients with pain[28], and researchers have suggested that pain is a powerful stimulus that leads to a redistribution of the motor system and adaptive changes in motor control[29]. Secondly, the cognitive pathway: at the cognitive-behavioral level, the fear-avoidance model of pain[30] illustrates that, for some patients, pain is often accompanied by an increase in fear and general avoidance of movements that may be associated with pain, which ultimately leads to a decrease in fitness and disability as time passesError! Reference source not found.

Notably, the results of this study demonstrated that low back pain and hip pain can increase the risk of gait abnormalities, while knee pain had no significant causal relationship with gait abnormalities. Further consideration is given from the results of our study, this may be related to the joint range of motion and positional structure of the knee joint. The gait cycle of human walking can be categorized into support phase and swing phase according to the position of the lower limbs during walking[32]. The activity of the support phase of the lower limbs belongs to the closed-chain movement, and the foot, ankle, knee, hip, pelvis, trunk, upper limbs, neck, head, etc. are all involved in the walking process. Any change in the closed-chain system will cause corresponding changes in the entire chain of motion, with the distal weight-bearing axis (ankle) having the greatest influence on the overall posture[33]. The swing phase belongs to the open chain movement, each joint can have isolated postural changes, but often cause compensatory changes in the posture of the contralateral lower limb, with the proximal axis (hip joint) having the greatest influence[34]. The knee joint primarily performs flexion and extension movements and the range of flexion and extension is −10° to 135°, but it has little effect on the support and sway phases involved in gait. Although the knee joint also has internal rotation and abduction functions, the range of knee internal rotation activities is 0° to 30° and the range of external rotation activities is 0° to 40°, compared with the lumbar, hip, ankle and other parts, in the process of walking, the range of motion of knee joint is smaller, the activity participation is lower, and thus the impact on the gait is relatively small.

The results of reverse MR analysis suggested that gait abnormalities did not have a significant causal effect on localized musculoskeletal pain, which may be due to the fact that only four SNPs were included in the reverse MR analysis, which may have led to the underestimation of exposure-outcome associations in the two-sample MR study, and the main reason for this bias was the insufficient sample size; therefore, we should be cautious in interpreting this result, and it needs to be validation using a larger sample size of GWAS data related to gait abnormalities in the future[35].

Patients with gait abnormalities have been increasing in recent years, and our study will enhance the management of localized musculoskeletal pain in a high-risk population. Therefore, this study is crucial to explore the causal relationship between localized musculoskeletal pain factors and the risk of gait abnormalities. Our MR study provides strong evidence for a causal relationship between localized musculoskeletal pain and increased risk of gait abnormalities, which inspires us to actively intervene in the localized pain symptoms present in patients with gait abnormalities when treating and rehabilitating them clinically, and to restore their imbalanced motor control system through effective pain management, thus improving the quality of life of patients with gait abnormalities. However, further validation and exploration of the intrinsic mechanism of the causal association between the two is still needed in the future[36].

## 4 Conclusion

Based on the findings from our study, we have gained valuable insights into the relationship between localized musculoskeletal pain and gait abnormalities. We observed that localized musculoskeletal pain, special low back pain and hip pain, may elevate the risk of gait abnormalities, while conversely, gait abnormalities do not significantly contribute to the occurrence of localized musculoskeletal pain. Consistent with prior research, our study underscores altered movement patterns and control strategies in individuals with localized musculoskeletal pain during daily activities, emphasizing the impact of pain on gait characteristics. Overall, our study contributes novel insights into the complex interplay between localized musculoskeletal pain and gait abnormalities, holding significant implications for the development of effective interventions. Future research endeavors should delve deeper into these relationships and translate findings into clinical practice to enhance the management of gait abnormalities and pain in patients.

## Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

## Author Contributions

XXM, TGH conceived and designed the study. XXM, ZKY and HLQ extracted data and processed information using the appropriate software. XXM, LY and LXY analyzed and interpreted the data. All authors participated in drafting the manuscript, read and approved the final version of the manuscript, and provided consent for publication.

## Funding

This work was supported financially by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No: 81973623).

## Data Availability Statement

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

*   Received August 18, 2024.
*   Revision received August 18, 2024.
*   Accepted August 19, 2024.


*   © 2024, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 4.0 International), CC BY 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

## References

1.  [1].Yang LN, Chen K, Yin XP, et al. (2022) The comprehensive neural mechanism of oxytocin in analgesia. Curr Neuropharmacol 20:147–157
    
    

2.  [2].Jackson T, Thomas S, Stabile V, et al. (2016) A systematic review and metaa-nalysis of the global burden of chronic pain without clear etiology in low and middle-income countries: trends in heterogeneous data and a proposal for new assessment methods. Anesth Analg 123:739–748.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1213/ANE.0000000000001389&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=27537761&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F08%2F19%2F2024.08.18.24312194.atom) 

3.  [3].Kassaw NA, Zhou A, Mulugeta A, Lee SH, Burgess S, Hyppönen E. Alcohol consumption and the risk of all-cause and cause-specific mortality-a linear and nonlinear Mendelian randomization study. Int J Epidemiol. 2024 Feb 14;53(2):dyae046.
    
    

4.  [4].Hunt MA, Birmingham TB, Bryant D, Jones I, Giffin JR, Jenkyn TR, et al. Lateral trunk lean explains variation in dynamic knee joint load in patients with medial compartment knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2008 May;16(5):591–9.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.joca.2007.10.017&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18206395&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F08%2F19%2F2024.08.18.24312194.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000255840600009&link_type=ISI) 

5.  [5].Foroughi N, Smith R, Vanwanseele B. The association of external knee adduction moment with biomechanical variables in osteoarthritis: a systematic review. Knee. 2009 Oct;16(5):303–9.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.knee.2008.12.007&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19321348&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F08%2F19%2F2024.08.18.24312194.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000270163000002&link_type=ISI) 

6.  [6].Reed JA, Meng DH. Clinical application of gait analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation,2006(07):500–503.
    
    

7.  [7]. Junxia Zhang,  Kun Gao,  Bing Xie. A review of gait analysis research [J]. Packaging Engineering,2022,43(10):41–53.
    
    

8.  [8].Yoshikawa M, Asaba K, Nakayama T. Causal effect of atrial fibrillation/flutter on chronic kidney disease: A bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization study. PLoS One. 2021 Dec 13;16(12):e0261020.
    
    

9.  [9].Yao C, Zhang Y, Lu P, Xiao B, Sun P, Tao J, et al. Exploring the bidirectional relationship between pain and mental disorders: a comprehensive Mendelian randomization study. J Headache Pain. 2023 Jul 7;24(1):82.
    
    

10. [10].Zhang K, Shi W, Zhang X, Pang R, Liang X, Xu Q, et al. Causal relationships between COVID-19 and osteoporosis: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study in European population. Front Public Health. 2023 May 24;11:1122095.
    
    

11. [11].Lv Z, Cui J, Zhang J. Smoking, alcohol and coffee consumption and risk of low back pain: a Mendelian randomization study. Eur Spine J. 2022 Nov;31(11):2913–2919.
    
    

12. [12].Guo G, Wu Y, Liu Y, Wang Z, Xu G, Wang X, et al. Exploring the causal effects of the gut microbiome on serum lipid levels: A two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis. Front Microbiol. 2023 Feb 16;14:1113334.
    
    

13. [13].Zhu Q, Chen L, Shen C. Causal relationship between leisure sedentary behaviors and low back pain risk: a Mendelian randomization study. Eur Spine J. 2023 Sep;32(9):3300–3308.
    
    

14. [14].Hu Y, Lin L, Zhang L, Li Y, Cui X, Lu M, et al. Identification of Circulating Plasma Proteins as a Mediator of Hypertension-Driven Cardiac Remodeling: A Mediation Mendelian Randomization Study. Hypertension. 2024 May;81(5):1132–1144.
    
    

15. [15].Wang X, Wu Y, Zhao P, Wang X, Wu W, Yang J. The causal relationship between serum metabolites and acne vulgaris: a Mendelian randomization study. Sci Rep. 2024 May 14;14(1):11045.
    
    

16. [16].Spiller W, Slichter D, Bowden J, Davey Smith G. Detecting and correcting for bias in Mendelian randomization analyses using Gene-by-Environment interactions. Int J Epidemiol. 2019 Jun 1;48(3):702–712.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=30462199&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F08%2F19%2F2024.08.18.24312194.atom) 

17. [17].Papadimitriou N, Dimou N, Tsilidis KK, et al. Physical activity and risks of breast and colorectal cancer: a Mendelian randomization analysis. Nat Commun. 2020 Jan 30;11(1):597.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41467-020-14389-8&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F08%2F19%2F2024.08.18.24312194.atom) 

18. [18].Tang X, Li Q, Li ZH. Mediating effect of metabolic syndrome in the association of educational attainment with intervertebral disc degeneration and low back pain. Heliyon. 2024 Apr 26;10(9):e30272.
    
    

19. [19].Duckworth A, Gibbons MA, Allen RJ, Almond H, Beaumont RN, Wood AR, et al. Telomere length and risk of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a mendelian randomization study. Lancet Respir Med. 2021 Mar;9(3):285–294.
    
    

20. [20].Ogawa EF, Shi L, Bean JF, Hausdorff JM, Dong Z, Manor B, et al. Chronic Pain Characteristics and Gait in Older Adults: The MOBILIZE Boston Study II. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020 Mar;101(3):418–425.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.apmr.2019.09.010&link_type=DOI) 

21. [21].Mokhtarinia H R, Sanjari M A, Chehrehrazi M, et al. Trunk coordination in healthy and chronic nonspecific low back pain subjects during repetitive flexion-extension tasks: effects of movement asymmetry, velocity and load[J]. Hum Mov Sci, 2016, 45: 182–192.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.humov.2015.11.007&link_type=DOI) 

22. [22].Shu P, Ji L, Ping Z, Sun Z, Liu W (2022) Association of insomnia and daytime sleepiness with low back pain: a bidirectional Mendelian randomization analysis. Front Genet 13:938334.
    
    

23. [23].Lv X, Liang F, Liu S, Deng X, Lai R, Du J, et al. Causal relationship between diet and knee osteoarthritis: A Mendelian randomization analysis. PLoS One. 2024 Jan 31;19(1):e0297269.
    
    

24. [24].Zhou J, Mi J, Peng Y, Han H, Liu Z (2021) Causal associations of obesity with the intervertebral degeneration, low back pain, and sciatica: a two-sample mendelian randomization study. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 12:740200.
    
    

25. [25].Liu S, Lv X, Deng X, Lai R, Du J, Wang C. Diet and risk of low back pain: a Mendelian randomization analysis. Eur Spine J. 2024 Feb;33(2):496–504.
    
    

26. [26].Wilder DG, Vining RD, Pohlman KA, Meeker WC, Xia T, Devocht JW, Gudavalli RM, Long CR, Owens EF, Goertz CM. Effect of spinal manipulation on sensorimotor functions in back pain patients: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2011 Jun 28;12:161.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/1745-6215-12-161&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21708042&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F08%2F19%2F2024.08.18.24312194.atom) 

27. [27].Cruz-Almeida Y, Rosso A, Marcum Z, Harris T, Newman AB, Nevitt M, et al. Associations of musculoskeletal pain with mobility in older adults. Potential cerebral mechanisms. vol. 00, The Journals of Gerontology: series A. 2017;00(00):1–7.
    
    

28. [28].Hodges P, van den Hoorn W, Dawson A, Cholewicki J. Changes in the mechanical properties of the trunk in low back pain may be associated with recurrence. J Biomech. 2009 Jan 5;42(1):61–6.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.10.001&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19062020&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F08%2F19%2F2024.08.18.24312194.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000263191300009&link_type=ISI) 

29. [29].Hodges P W. Pain and motor control: from the laboratory to rehabilitation[J]. J Electromyogr Kines, 2011, 21(2): 220–228.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jelekin.2011.01.002&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21306915&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F08%2F19%2F2024.08.18.24312194.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000287308600003&link_type=ISI) 

30. [30].Madeleine P. On functional motor adaptations: from the quantification of motor strategies to the prevention of musculoskeletal disorders in the neck-shoulder region[J]. Acta Physiol, 2010, 199(Suppl 679): 1–46.
    
    

31. [31].Beebe JA, Kronman C, Mahmud F, Basch M, Hogan M, Li E, et al. Gait Variability and Relationships With Fear, Avoidance, and Pain in Adolescents With Chronic Pain. Phys Ther.
    
    

32. [32].Arendt-Nielsen L, Nie H, Laursen MB, Laursen BS, Madeleine P, Simonsen OH, et al. Sensitization in patients with painful knee osteoarthritis. Pain. 2010 Jun;149(3):573–581.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.pain.2010.04.003&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20418016&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F08%2F19%2F2024.08.18.24312194.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000277804700026&link_type=ISI) 

33. [33].Yang C, Xiao H, Wang C, Mai L, Liu D, Qi Y, et al. Variation of plantar pressure in Chinese diabetes mellitus. Wound Repair Regen. 2015 Nov-Dec;23(6):932–8.
    
    

34. [34].Vlaeyen JWS, Linton SJ. Fear-avoidance and its consequences in chronic musculoskeletal pain: a state of the art. Pain. 2000 Apr;85(3):317–332.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0304-3959(99)00242-0&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10781906&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F08%2F19%2F2024.08.18.24312194.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000086745500002&link_type=ISI) 

35. [35].Barzilay Y, Segal G, Lotan R, et al. Patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain who reported reduction in pain and improvement in function also demonstrated an improvement in gait pattern[J]. European Spine Journal,2016,25(9):2761–2766.
    
    

36. [36].Roffey DM, Wai EK, Bishop P, Kwon BK, Dagenais S. Causal assessment of occupational standing or walking and low back pain: results of a systematic review. Spine J. 2010 Mar;10(3):262–72.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.spinee.2009.12.023&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20207335&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F08%2F19%2F2024.08.18.24312194.atom)