MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150110591 · doi:10.1139/h00-014

Short-Term Training: When Do Repeated Bouts of Resistance Exercise Become Training?

2000· review· en· W2150110591 on OpenAlexaff
Stuart M. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Applied Physiology · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMuscle hypertrophyResistance trainingStrength trainingMedicineEndocrinologyInternal medicineMuscle strengthPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic resistance training induces increases in muscle fibre cross-sectional area (CSA), otherwise known as hypertrophy. This is due to an increased volume percentage of myofibrillarproteins within a given fibre. The exact time-course for muscle fibre hypertrophy is not well-documented but appears to require at least 6-7 weeks of regular resistive training at reasonably high intensity before increases in fibre CSA are deemed significant. Proposed training-induced changes in neural drive are hypothesized to increase strength due to increased synchrony of motor unit firing, reducedant agonist muscle activity, and/or a reduction in any bilateral strength deficit. Nonetheless, increases in muscle protein synthesis were observed following an isolated bout of resistance exercise. In addition, muscle balance was positive, following resistance exercise when amino acids were infused/ingested. This showed that protein accretion occurred during the postexercise period. The implications of this hypothesis for training-induced increases in strength are discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations115
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Applied PhysiologySame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207