The Total Work Measured During a High Intensity Isokinetic Fatigue Test Is Associated With Anaerobic Work Capacity.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to determine whether total work measured during a high intensity isokinetic fatigue test (TWFAT) could be considered as a valid measure of anaerobic work capacity (AWC), such as determined by total work measured during a Wingate Anaerobic Test (TWWAnT). Twenty well-trained cyclists performed 2 randomly ordered sessions involving a high intensity isokinetic fatigue test consisting in 30 reciprocal maximal concentric contractions of knee flexors and extensors at 180°·s(-1), and a Wingate Anaerobic Test. We found that TWFAT of knee extensors was largely lower than TWWAnT (4151 ± 691 vs 22313 ± 2901 J, respectively, p < 0.05, Hedge's g = 4.27). Both measures were highly associated (r = 0.83), and the 95% limits of agreement (LoA) represented 24.5% of TWWAnT. TWFAT of knee flexors (2151 ± 540 J) was largely lower than TWWAnT (p < 0.05, g = 9.52). By contrast, both measures were not associated (r = 0.09), and the 95% LoA represented 31.1% of TWWAnT. Combining TWFAT of knee flexors and knee extensors into a single measure (6302 ± 818 J) did not changed neither improved these observations. We still found a large difference with TWWAnT (p < 0.05, g = 5.26), a moderate association (r = 0.65) and 95% LoA representing 25.5% of TWWAnT. We concluded that TWFAT of knee extensors could be considered as a valid measure of AWC, since both measure were highly associated. However, the mean difference between both measures and their 95% LoA were too large to warrant interchangeability. Key pointsTotal work performed during a high intensity isokinetic fatigue test can be considered as a valid measure of anaerobic work capacity (as determined by total work performance during a 30-s Wingate anaerobic test).The 95% limits of agreement are two large to allow a direct comparison between both measures. In other words, it is not possible to estimate the magnitude of performance improvement during a 30-s Wingate anaerobic test from that observed during a high intensity isokinetic fatigue test.In addition to provide sport scientists and coaches with measures of peak torque and ratios between agonists and antagonists muscles in a perspective of injury prevention, isokinetic dynamometry can also be used in the physiological assessment of athletes. However, some precautions should be taken in the interpretation of data.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".