An investigation into the possible physiological mechanisms associated with changes in performance related to acute responses to different preactivity stretch modalities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to explore the potential mechanisms underlying performance changes linked to different warm-up stretch modalities. Twenty-one male collegiate-semiprofessional soccer players (age, 20.8 +/- 2.3 years) performed under 3 different warm-up conditions: a no-stretch warm-up (WU), a warm-up including static passive stretches (SPS), and a warm-up incorporating static dynamic stretches (SDS). Countermovement jump, drop jump, peak torque, heart rate, core temperature, movement kinematics, and electromyography (EMG) were recorded for each intervention. Significant increases (p < 0.001) in performance were recorded for the countermovement, drop jump, and peak torque measures when the SDS was compared with the WU and SPS trials. When mechanism data were analysed, heart rate was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in the SDS condition compared with the SPS and WU conditions (a pattern also shown with core temperature), whereas the WU condition heart rate was also significantly higher than the SPS condition heart rate. When EMG data were examined for the rectus femoris muscle, significantly greater (p < 0.01) muscle activity was observed in the SDS condition compared with the SPS condition. It seems the most likely mechanisms to explain the increase in performance in the SDS condition compared with the SPS condition are increased heart rate, greater muscle activity, and increased peak torque.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".