## 3 Results
These results indicate a strong improvement in the anteroposterior dimension with eyes closed, while the mediolateral and COP measures remained non-significant. Such non-significance could reflect the inherent variability under eyes-closed conditions or an insufficient training duration for robust improvements of all the balance dimensions. (c) Analysis of Results for Single-Leg Balance Testing--Right Leg Variable Codes:  
* SP1 PD_AP: single-leg stance on the right leg--anteposterior direction. * SP1 PD_ML: single-leg stance on the right leg--mediolateral direction. * SP1 PD_COP: single-leg stance on the right leg--center-of-pressure (COP) movement distance. All the SP1 PD_AP, SP1 PD_ML, and SP1 PD_COP variables were measured in millimeters (mm). The statistical analysis, as shown in Table 8, reveals that for the dependent variable \"SP1 PD_ML_difference\", the results are statistically significant (F = 8.966; \(p\) = 0.006), with a partial \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.243, indicating a moderate-to-large effect size. For the dependent variable \"SP1 PD_COP_difference\", the analysis, presented in Table 8, yields a statistically significant result (F = 4.344; \(p\) = 0.046), with a partial \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.134, reflecting a moderate effect size. No statistically significant differences were observed for the variable \"SP1 PD_AP_difference\". (d) Analysis of Results for Single-Leg Balance Testing--Left Leg Variable Codes:  
* SP1 PS_AP: single-leg stance on the left leg--anteposterior direction. * SP1 PS_ML: single-leg stance on the left leg--mediolateral direction. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Dependent Variable (mm)** & **Sum of Squares** & **Degrees of Freedom** & **F** & \(p\)**-Value** & \(\eta^{2}\) \\ \hline OI2P\_AP\_difference & 9.296 & 1 & 14.249 & 0.001 * & 0.337 \\ OI2P\_ML\_difference & 4.961 & 1 & 1.645 & 0.210 & 0.055 \\ OI2P\_COP\_difference & 2268.612 & 1 & 0.208 & 0.652 & 0.007 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note.* indicates \(p\) < 0.005.  
\end{table} 
Table 7: Analysis of the results of two-leg balance testing with eyes closed. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Dependent Variable (mm)** & **Sum of Squares** & **Degrees of Freedom** & **F** & \(p\)**-Value** & \(\eta^{2}\) \\ \hline SP1 PD\_AP\_difference & 3.874 & 1 & 2.763 & 0.108 & 0.090 \\ SP1 PD\_ML\_difference & 26.152 & 1 & 8.966 & 0.006 * & 0.243 \\ SP1 PD\_COP\_difference & 53,602.587 & 1 & 4.344 & 0.046 * & 0.134 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note.* indicates \(p\) < 0.005.  
\end{table} 
Table 8: Differences between EG and CG in single-leg balance values on the right foot. * SP1 PS_COP: single-leg stance on the left leg--center-of-pressure (COP) movement distance. All the SP1 PS_AP, SP1 PS_ML, and SP1 PS_COP variables were measured in millimeters (mm), representing the distance of the center-of-pressure shifts in the anteroposterior and mediolateral planes for a single-leg stance on the left leg. The statistical analysis, as shown in Table 9, reveals that for the dependent variable \"SP1 PS_ML_difference\", the results are statistically significant (F = 6.396; \(p\) = 0.017), with a partial \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.186, indicating a moderate effect size. For the dependent variable \"SP1 PS_COP_difference\", the analysis, presented in Table 8, reports a result close to statistical significance (F = 3.322; \(p\) = 0.079), suggesting a potential difference between the groups, though not definitive. The partial \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.106 reflects a small-to-moderate effect size. No statistically significant differences were observed for the variable \"SP1 PS_AP_difference\". While improvements were evident in the mediolateral control on the left leg, the anteroposterior direction did not reach significance. Future studies may employ more targeted single-leg interventions or longer protocols to determine whether stronger effects emerge for all the axes of balance.