Sex Differences in Quadriceps Strength in OA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purposes of this study were to determine 1) whether sex differences in quadriceps torque and isotonic power persist when controlling for muscle volume (i. e., torque/muscle volume and power/muscle volume) in participants with knee osteoarthritis (OA) and 2) the factors responsible for potential sex differences. Isometric torque, isotonic power (the product of torque and velocity, measured at 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50% maximal voluntary contraction; MVC) and maximal unloaded velocity were assessed in men (n=16, mean age=62.1 ± 7.2) and women (n=17, mean age=60.4 ± 4.3) with knee OA. Torque and power were normalized to muscle volume. The interpolated twitch technique was used to measure voluntary activation (VA) and evoked twitch and torque-frequency characteristics were measured to obtain information about muscle fibre distribution. Torque and power at all loads were significantly lower in women (p<0.05). Sex differences in power were reduced by 50% when controlling for muscle volume but were still significant at 10-40% MVC (p<0.05). No differences in VA, torque-frequency properties or time-to-peak tension of the evoked twitch were observed (p>0.05). These results suggest that only minor sex differences in torque and power persist when controlling for muscle volume. As VA and contractile property differences were not observed, other factors seem to be responsible.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".