Intermittent lower-limb occlusion enhances recovery after strenuous exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Repeated cycles of vascular occlusion followed by reperfusion initiate a protective mechanism that acts to mitigate future cell injury. Such ischemic episodes are known to improve vasodilation, oxygen utilization, muscle function, and have been demonstrated to enhance exercise performance. Thus, the use of occlusion cuffs represents a novel intervention that may improve subsequent exercise performance. Fourteen participants performed an exercise protocol that involved lower-body strength and power tests followed by repeated sprints. Occlusion cuffs were then applied unilaterally (2 × 3-min per leg) with a pressure of either 220 (intervention) or 15 mm Hg (control). Participants immediately repeated the exercise protocol, and then again 24 h later. The intervention elicited delayed beneficial effects (24 h post-intervention) in the countermovement jump test with concentric (effect size (ES) = 0.36) and eccentric (ES = 0.26) velocity recovering more rapidly compared with the control. There were also small beneficial effects on 10- and 40-m sprint times. In the squat jump test there were delayed beneficial effects of occlusion on eccentric power (ES = 1.38), acceleration (ES = 1.24), and an immediate positive effect on jump height (ES = 0.61). Thus, specific beneficial effects on recovery of power production and sprint performance were observed both immediately and 24 h after intermittent unilateral occlusion was applied to each leg.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".