MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000430768 · doi:10.1002/mus.20078

Resistance training exercise and creatine in patients with Charcot–Marie–Tooth disease

2004· article· en· W2000430768 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMuscle & Nerve · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHereditary Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreatineCreatine MonohydrateResistance trainingPlaceboMedicineInternal medicineStrength trainingPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationEndocrinologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resistance exercise and creatine supplementation independently improve strength and function in patients with certain neuromuscular diseases. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of resistance training with and without creatine supplementation on muscle, strength, and function in patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth (CMT) disease. Twenty patients with CMT consumed 5 g/day creatine or placebo while participating in resistance training for 12 weeks. Energy metabolites, muscle fiber type and size, strength, and timed activities of daily living were measured before and after training. There were no differences between creatine or placebo groups for any outcome. For the groups combined, exercise training increased type I muscle fiber diameter (48.2 +/- 14.2 microm vs. 55.4 +/- 14.8 microm), strength, and activities of daily living (ADL) times. Thus, patients respond to resistance training with muscle fiber adaptations, and improvements in strength and function. Creatine was not beneficial.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.194 · 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