Optimizing the Wingate Anaerobic Cycling Test for Youth With Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Wingate Anaerobic Test (WAnT) can assess muscle function in youth with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Our objective was to compare peak power (PP) and mean power (MP) when the WAnT is performed with a standard vs. an optimized braking force. Eight patients with JIA between the ages of 8 and 18 participated in two sessions. Optimal braking force was determined with a series of 15-s force-velocity tests performed against braking forces ranging from 3.5 to 8.5% of body weight. Participants then performed two randomized WAnTs against the standard (4.5%) and optimal braking forces. PP tended to be greater in the optimized vs. standard WAnT (12.5 ± 2.6 vs. 10.8 ± 1.0 W/kg, respectively; p = .07). No differences were observed for MP (standard: 6.2 ± 0.9 vs. optimized: 6.2 ± 1.1 W/kg; p = .9). Optimization of the WAnT tended to increase PP by 10-28% in youth with JIA.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".