Relative static stretch-induced impairments and dynamic stretch-induced enhancements are similar in young and middle-aged men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Middle-aged individuals may not respond in a similar manner as younger individuals. The study's objective was to examine the effect of static (SS) and dynamic stretching (DS) in young and middle-aged men on subsequent performance. Ten young (22 ± 1.4 years) and 8 middle-aged men (46.3 ± 6.5 years) participated in 3 conditions consisting of SS (4 × 30 s for right and left quadriceps, hamstrings, and plantar flexors), DS (8 × 30 s of bilateral butt kicks, walking lunges, and plantar flexors) and control. Dependent variables included sit and reach, hip extension flexibility, countermovement jump (CMJ) height, drop jump (DJ) height, static balance, reaction (RT) and movement time (MT). Measurements were taken pre-intervention, post- and 10 min post-intervention. A 3-way repeated measurement ANOVA revealed that the younger men had higher jump heights, faster RT and MT, and greater flexibility than the middle-aged men. DS significantly enhanced DJ (p = 0.04) and CMJ (p = 0.006) height compared with SS and control conditions. SS (p < 0.0001) and DS (p = 0.004) post-intervention sit and reach scores were significantly greater than pre-intervention scores. There were no significant differences between the SS and DS sit and reach scores. CMJ heights were impaired (p = 0.04) by SS. Conversely, DS post-intervention jump heights were significantly (p < 0.0001) higher than SS post-, control post-, and control 10 min post-intervention. SS-induced impairments and DS-induced enhancements of CMJ height were not affected by age. DS provided similar improvements in sit and reach scores as SS. DS is recommended as the most appropriate stretching routine prior to work or athletic performance for younger and middle-aged men.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".