MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039020327 · doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000000848

Effect of Gender, Energetics, and Biomechanics on Swimming Masters Performance

2015· article· en· W2039020327 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Maria Inês Paes Ferreira, Tiago M. Barbosa, Henrique P. Neiva, Carlos Marta, Mário J. Costa, Daniel A. Marinho

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFederation for the Humanities and Social SciencesUniversidade da Beira Interior
KeywordsEnergeticsBlood lactateAnimal scienceVO2 maxBiomechanicsStroke (engine)MedicineInternal medicineHeart rateAnatomyBlood pressureBiologyPhysicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of gender and energetics on biomechanics and performance of masters swimmers over 1 season. Twenty-five masters swimmers (14 male and 11 female) were assessed 3 times (TP1, TP2, and TP3) during a season (male personal record in 200-m freestyle event: 173.00 ± 31.41 seconds: female personal record in 200-m freestyle event: 200.73 ± 25.02 seconds). An incremental 5 × 200-m step test was selected to evaluate velocity at 4 mmol·l⁻¹ of blood lactate concentration (v4), maximal blood lactate concentration after exercise (La(peak)), maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O2max), stroke frequency, stroke length (SL), stroke index (SI), and propelling efficiency of the arm stroke (η(p)). The 200-m freestyle performance and average swimming velocity (v200) were also monitored. Significant differences were observed between males and females for the 200-m freestyle performance, SL, SI, and La(peak). Performance (205.18 ± 24.47 seconds; 197.45 ± 20.97 seconds; 193.45 ± 18.12 seconds), SL (1.69 ± 0.17 m; 1.79 ± 0.13 m; 1.78 ± 0.15 m), SI (1.68 ± 0.31 m²·c⁻¹·s⁻¹; 1.83 ± 0.27 m²·c⁻¹·s⁻¹; 1.85 ± 0.27 m²·c⁻¹·s⁻¹), η(p) (0.32 ± 0.04; 0.33 ± 0.03; 0.33 ± 0.04), and V̇O2max (38.71 ± 3.44 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹; 43.43 ± 3.71 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹; 43.95 ± 7.02 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹) have changed significantly throughout the season (TP1, TP2, and TP3, respectively) in female swimmers. In male, significant changes were found in η(p) (0.33 ± 0.07; 0.36 ± 0.05; 0.36 ± 0.06) and V̇O2max (41.65 ± 7.30 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹; 45.19 ± 6.55 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹; 50.19 ± 9.65 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹) over the season (TP1, TP2, and TP3, respectively). Gender presented a significant effect on SL (TP2: η(p)² = 0.29; TP3: η(p)² = 0.37), SI (TP2: η(p)² = 0.25), and La(peak) (TP3: η(p)² = 0.42). v4 (TP1: η(p)² = 0.23), SL (TP1: η(p)² = 0.46), SI (TP1: η(p)² = 0.78; TP2: η(p)² = 0.37; TP3: η(p)² = 0.32), and η(p) (TP1: η(p)² = 0.28) had a significant effect on performance. Male masters swimmers have better performance, SL, SI, and La(peak) than female counterparts. Female masters swimmers enhanced significantly the 200-m freestyle performance over the season due to the improvement in swimming technique (SL, SI, and η(p)) and energetic factors (v4 and V̇O2max). Nonsignificant improvements were observed for the males' performance. Gender has a significant effect on SL, SI, and La(peak). Therefore, performance is more dependent on technical factors than energetics.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations22
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning ResearchSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207