## 4 Discussion  
To date, no full datasets have been conducted on the correlation between muscular strength, flexibility, and the reached distance measured in all directions of the mSEBT in young healthy women. Accordingly, this is the first investigation to report on this possible connection. In the present study, peak strength of hip flexors and knee extensors showed a significant positive correlation with reach distance in the ANT direction. These findings are partially consistent with the findings of [PERSON] et al. (2018) who reported a positive correlation between the ANT reach distance and hip flexion range of motion and hip extensor moment. Likewise, the results of our investigation are partially consistent with the outcomes of [PERSON] (2018), who reported a significant positive correlation between hip flexion and extension strength and ANT direction reach distance. This could be greatly attributed to the participant's posture while performing the task, as his trunk tends to lean backward in order to maintain his balance. In response to the effect gravity action on the upper body, there is a large hip-extension moment, which necessitates generation of internal flexion moment. A paucity of research endeavors has examined the kinematic prognosticators influencing mSEBT proficiency, with each investigation yielding heterogeneous outcomes. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Variable** & **Mean \(\pm\) SD** \\ \hline Age (year) & 14.18 \(\pm\) 0.72 \\ Height (m) & 1.59 \(\pm\) 0.11 \\ Weight (kg) & 62.68 \(\pm\) 19.91 \\ BMI (kg/m\({}^{2}\)) & 23.86 \(\pm\) 6.16 \\ Limb length right (cm) & 87.25 \(\pm\) 5.39 \\ Limb length left (cm) & 87.22 \(\pm\) 5.37 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Characteristics of participants n = 74. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Reach Direction** & **ANT** & **PM** & **PL** & **Composite** \\ \cline{3-5}  & **of Y Balance Test** & **r** & **r** & **r** & **r** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Strength} & Hip flexor & 0.270 * & 0.256 * & 0.210 & 0.283 * \\  & Hip extensor & 0.200 & \(-\)0.011 & \(-\)0.056 & 0.000 \\  & Hip abductor & 0.133 & 0.040 & \(-\)0.031 & 0.006 \\  & Knee extensor & 0.215 & 0.166 & 0.115 & 0.156 \\ \multirow{2}{*}{Flexibility} & Thomas test & \(-\)0.254 * & \(-\)0.124 & \(-\)0.018 & \(-\)0.092 \\  & Sit and Reach test & 0.075 & 0.033 & \(-\)0.032 & 0.074 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
* Indicates significant correlation at the \(p\) \(<\) 0.05 level, ANT: anterior, PM: posteromedial, and PL: posterolateral.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Pearson correlation coefficients (r) between lower limb strength, flexibility and mSEBT reach distance in the ANT, PM, and PL reach directions. The discrepancies in the association between mSEBT scores and muscle strength could be explained by how the test was conducted such as the allowance of heel lift during reaching [32]. Performing the mSEBT under such limitations could lead to variations in posture control mechanisms, as it heavily depends on a feedforward control strategy until toe contact happens [29]. This strategy necessitates more activity of the hip flexor muscles in order to maintain balance and accomplish the anterior reach task by trunk movement. However, while trunk kinematics is not within the scope of the present study, it was reported that contralateral trunk rotation was the most salient kinematic interpreter of ANT reach distances [27; 32]. The current study's findings showed a positive correlation between hip and knee strength and the reach component in the PM direction, with a significant positive correlation in hip flexor muscle strength. Such a finding could occur as a result of the feedforward control strategy, as previously mentioned. Additionally, the PM and PL reaches were carried out in the diagonal planes, as opposed to the sagittal plane used for the ANT reach, which may have necessitated compensatory trunk motions to achieve balance within the combined plane. This explanation is supported by [PERSON] et al.