MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079000838 · doi:10.1519/jsc.0b013e3181a3ce61

Postactivation Potentiation in Distance Runners After Two Different Field Running Protocols

2009· article· en· W2079000838 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel Boullosa, José Tuimil

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJumpingJumpMathematicsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyMedicinePhysicsPhysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to compare jumping capacity after performing the "Université de Montréal Track Test" (UMTT) and the time limit (Tlim) at maximal aerobic speed. At the end of the competitive season, 12 well-trained male endurance runners performed the UMTT and Tlim tests on 2 different days separated by 48 hours to 7 days. Countermovement jump (CMJ) performance was assessed before and at the second and seventh minute after the 2 running protocols. An enhanced CMJ was observed at the second minute of recovery after UMTT and Tlim (p = 0.000; p = 0.015, respectively) and remained elevated only after the UMTT (p = 0.000). No significant correlations were found between jump and endurance field running performance. It is concluded that the postactivation potentiation profile after fatiguing running exercises in distance runners is protocol dependent with the mechanism yet to be determined.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 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

Citations63
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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