MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Hamstring and Quadriceps Strength Balance in Normal and Hamstring Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Reconstructed Subjects

2004· article· en· W2031386650 on OpenAlexaff
Laurie A. Hiemstra, Sandra C. Webber, Peter B. MacDonald, Dean Kriellaars

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Sport Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnterior cruciate ligamentMedicineHamstringRange of motionAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionEccentricKnee JointACL injuryBalance (ability)OrthodonticsAnatomyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapySurgeryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and characterize the agonist-antagonist strength balance (hamstring/quadriceps [H/Q] ratio and dynamic control ratio [DCR]) about the knee specific to velocity, range of motion, and contraction type. We hypothesized that there would be systematic variation in the H/Q ratio and DCR based on knee joint angle, angular velocity, and contraction type. We also hypothesized that these ratios would be altered in the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-reconstructed group in favor of protecting the ACL graft (relative knee flexor strength when strain on the ACL is the greatest). DESIGN: Cross-sectional design. SETTING: A tertiary care sport medicine clinic. PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen subjects more than 1 year after hamstring tendon ACL reconstruction were compared with 30 active uninjured control subjects. INTERVENTIONS: Isokinetic strength testing was performed over 5 degrees to 95 degrees knee joint range of motion, 5 angular velocities (50, 100, 150, 200, 250 degrees/s), for concentric and eccentric contractions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Angle and velocity-matched H/Q ratio maps and DCR maps were produced for each group. Difference maps allowed quantification of the differences between the groups. RESULTS: Angle and velocity-matched H/Q ratio maps demonstrated systematic variation based on joint angle, velocity, and contraction type for both the control (H/Q, approximately 0-1.42; DCR, approximately 0-1.57) and the ACL-reconstructed group (H/Q, approximately 0-1.33; DCR, approximately 0-1.35). Difference maps demonstrate regional (angle and velocity-specific) alteration in the ratio between the ACL-reconstructed and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Specific imbalances were demonstrated in the ACL-reconstructed group compared with control. In high knee flexion angles, the low H/Q ratio may represent a compromised ability of the hamstrings to stabilize the knee joint throughout the full range of motion. Near full knee extension shifts in favor of the knee flexors may represent an attempt to stabilize the knee at the angle of greatest ACL strain. These finding have implications for graft donor site selection and postoperative rehabilitation as well as provide insight into the neuromuscular control of the knee.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations100
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of Sport MedicineSame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207