MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Can 16–18-Year-Old Elite Ballet Dancers Improve Their Hip and Ankle Range of Motion Over a 12-Month Period?

2000· article· en· W2017448340 on OpenAlexaff
Karim M. Khan, Kim L. Bennell, Selena Ng, Bernadette Matthews, Peter Roberts‎, Caroline Nattrass, Sarah Way, Janet Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Sport Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDiversity and Impact of Dance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupine positionAnkleBallet dancerBalletRange of motionMedicineTurnoutPhysical therapyExternal rotationClassical balletPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryDance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a 12-month intensive ballet training regimen on hip and ankle range of motion in male and female, first- and second-year professional dancers. DESIGN: 12-month longitudinal follow-up. SETTING: National classical ballet school in Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 28 female and 20 male full-time ballet students with a mean +/- 1 SD, ages 16.8 +/- 0.8 and 17.7 +/- 1.2 years, respectively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Degrees of range of motion of left and right sides for the following movements: standing plié in parallel-passive ankle dorsiflexion (DF); standing turnout in the balletic first position--lower leg external rotation (LLER); supine hip external rotation (ER); supine hip internal rotation (IR). An additional range of motion was calculated: external rotation below the hip joint (BHER) derived by subtracting hip ER from LLER. MAIN RESULTS: In all subjects combined, hip and ankle ranges increased statistically on the right. However, the amount was generally minimal and most at the borderline of the amount of error associated with the measurement tool. While there was no change in LLER, there was a decrease in BHER. There were no overall gender differences, and year differences existed only for left hip ER and total hip ER with first-year dancers showing significant improvements in these ranges. For DF and sum of hip IR, first-year males and second-year females had increases in range. There was a negative relationship between baseline range and the amount of change over the 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Dancers ages 16-18 years who enter full-time ballet training did not augment their ankle dorsiflexion to any appreciable degree. Some, but certainly not all, increased their hip active external rotation over 12 months without increasing their total lower limb turnout. Hip ER was more likely to improve in the first-year rather than second-year student in this elite full-time training school.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations47
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of Sport MedicineSame topicDiversity and Impact of DanceFrench-language works237,207