MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Determining Critical Power in Forearm Handgrip Exercise: Repeatability of a Single "All Out" Exercise Test

2010· article· en· W2044531120 on OpenAlexaff
J. Mikhail Kellawan, Daniel Moylan, Catherine Nelson, Michael E. Tschakovsky

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsometric exerciseForearmSupine positionReproducibilityPhysical therapyMedicinePhysical exercisePhysical medicine and rehabilitationCardiologyMathematicsInternal medicineAnatomyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critical power (CP) is the maximal power output where oxygen uptake and metabolic markers can be maintained for an extended period of time without drifting to maximal values. Classically, CP is identified from several repeats of constant load exercise to exhaustion across a range of exercise intensities, resulting in a hyperbolic function: Tlim = W'/(P-CP), where Tlim is the time to exhaustion, P is the power output, CP is the asymptote often referred to as "critical power" and W' is the curvature constant. Recently it has been demonstrated that power/force/torque stabilizes by the final 30 s of single "all out" cycling or knee extension exercise bouts maintained for ∼3-5 min and this is strongly correlated with the traditional CP test value. However, the reproducibility of CP estimated from all out tests in forearm handgrip exercise is unknown. PURPOSE: To determine the reproducibility of CP estimated from single "all out" exercise bouts in forearm handgrip exercise. METHODS: 10 healthy subjects (8 male, 2 female), completed 3 maximal effort isometric handgrip exercise trials (1 familiarization, 2 experimental) on separate days. Exercise consisted of isometric forearm handgrip squeezing (1 s contraction - 2 s relaxation duty cycle) for 7 minutes (140 contractions) in the supine position with the arm at heart level. Maximal voluntary contraction (MVC; kg) was determined prior to the exercise trial. Subjects were required to attempt an MVC on every contraction, with visual feedback on force output provided continuously on a computer screen. Constant verbal encouragement was provided, but subjects were not aware of elapsed time. CP was calculated as the average peak contraction force during the last 30 s of the 2nd and 3rd all out handgrip trials. RESULTS: The within-subject trail to trial coefficient of variation (CV) was 7.02 ± 5.26 % (range 16.45-0.32%). CV was < 10% in 7/10 subjects. The test-retest correlation r2 was 0.95. The group-averaged end test CP was greater in the second trial (24.30 ± 8.17 kg vs. 22.50 ± 8.41 kg, p= 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Estimates of forearm handgripping CP from short duration "all out" handgrip exercise bouts demonstrate acceptably low variability. However, the variability appears to be systematic, with higher estimates likely in the second trial.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studies→French-language works237,207→