Preservation of Eccentric Torque of the Knee Extensors and Flexors in Patients With COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to compare the concentric and eccentric torque of the knee extensors (KEs) and flexors (KFs) in persons with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with matched controls. Muscle volume and intramuscular fat infiltration of the thigh muscles were also compared between groups. Methods Twenty persons with moderate to severe COPD and 20 control participants, matched for age, sex, and body mass index, participated in the study. Concentric and eccentric isokinetic torque of the KEs and KFs were measured on a KinCom dynamometer. Muscle volume of the quadriceps, hamstrings, and adductors and intramuscular fat infiltration were estimated from T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Muscle volume of the quadriceps and hamstrings was used to normalize torque measurements of the KEs and KFs, respectively. Results Absolute concentric and eccentric torque was lower in the COPD group than in controls. However, normalized eccentric torque was higher in persons with COPD (P < .05). Persons with COPD demonstrated lower muscle volume of all thigh muscle groups (P < .01) and greater intramuscular fat infiltration (P < .002) than controls. Conclusions Although absolute torque of the KEs and KFs are lower in persons with COPD than in controls, normalized eccentric torque is actually higher in persons with COPD. A further examination of factors that contribute to the enhancement of eccentric torque in persons with COPD is warranted. This study compared concentric and eccentric torque of knee extensors and flexors in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with matched controls. Absolute torque was lower in COPD than in controls. However, normalized eccentric torque was higher in COPD. Factors contributing to enhanced eccentric torque in patients with COPD require further investigation.
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 | 0.001 | 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".