MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1942124246 · doi:10.1139/apnm-2015-0107

Low-intensity eccentric contractions of the knee extensors and flexors protect against muscle damage

2015· article· en· W1942124246 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Min-Ju Lin, Trevor C. Chen, Hsin-Lian Chen, Bo-Han Wu, Kazunori Nosaka

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicExercise and Physiological Responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEccentricMuscle damageMedicineEccentric exerciseIntensity (physics)Physical medicine and rehabilitationSarcomereAnatomyInternal medicineStructural engineeringPhysicsMyocyteEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the magnitude and duration of the protective effect of low-intensity eccentric contractions (LowEC) against damage induced by maximal eccentric contractions (MaxEC) of the knee flexors (KF) and extensors (KE). Young men were assigned to 8 experimental groups and 2 control groups (n = 13/group); the experimental groups performed LowEC of KF or KE 2 days (2d), 1 week (1wk), 2 weeks (2wk), or 3 weeks (3wk) before MaxEC, while the control groups performed MaxEC of KF or KE without LowEC. The 2d, 1wk, 2wk, and 3wk groups performed 30 LowEC of KF or 60 LowEC of KE with a load of 10% of maximal voluntary isometric contraction strength on a resistance-training machine, and all groups performed 30 MaxEC of KF or 60 MaxEC of KE on an isokinetic dynamometer. Several muscle damage markers were measured from before to 2 days after exercise (LowEC) or from before to 5 days after exercise (MaxEC). No significant changes in any variables were evident after LowEC. The changes in all variables after MaxEC were smaller (P < 0.05) for the 2d and 1wk groups (e.g., peak creatine kinase activity: 1002 ± 501 IU/L; peak muscle soreness: 13 ± 5 mm) than for the control group (peak creatine kinase activity: 3005 ± 983 IU/L; peak muscle soreness 28 ± 6 mm) for both KE and KF. There were no significant differences between the 2d and 1wk groups or among the 2wk, 3wk, and control groups. These results show that LowEC provided 30%-66% protection against damage induced by MaxEC of KF and KE, and the protective effect lasted 1 week.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and MetabolismSame topicExercise and Physiological ResponsesFrench-language works237,207