MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Effect Of Acl Graft Type On Side-step Cutting In Young Athletes

2016· article· en· W2467440811 on OpenAlexaff
J. Lee Pace, Nicole M. Mueske, Ricardo A. Padilla, Mia J. Katzel, Bitte S. Healy, Tracy Zaslow, Bianca Edison, Tishya A.L. Wren

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for International Peace and Security
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGround reaction forceAthletesHamstringKnee flexionAnalysis of varianceSurgeryPhysical therapyInternal medicineKinematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Due to a slightly higher re-tear rate for ACL reconstruction (ACLR) with hamstring (HT) versus patellar tendon (PT), differences in movement strategies were assessed during side-step cutting in young athletes with recent ACLR to determine if graft type affected post-operative motion. METHODS: Dominant limbs from 21 athletes without lower extremity injury or previous surgery (age 14.9 ± 2.0 years) and 26 limbs in athletes who underwent unilateral ACLR (5.1-8.0 months post-operative) were included. 18 patients had HT ACLR (age 16.6 ± 3.7 years) and 8 had PT ACLR (age 16.7 ± 1.2 years). Lower extremity 3D data was recorded during the deceleration phase of a 45° cut. Group differences were assessed using analysis of variance with Bonferroni post-hoc tests. RESULTS: The HT group had a slower approach velocity than controls (2.9 vs. 3.5 m/s; p=0.006) with intermediate velocity in the PT group (3.2 m/s). Both the HT and PT groups had lower peak ground reaction force (GRF) compared to controls (HT: 2.0 body weights (BW), PT: 2.2 BW, Control: 2.8 BW; p≤0.02), along with lower peak knee flexion moments (HT: 1.4 Nm/kg, PT: 1.3 Nm/kg, Control: 2.2 Nm/kg; p=0.002). The PT group had less power absorption at the knee than controls (0.3 vs. 0.7 Nm/kg; p=0.07), while the HT group had more at the hip (0.4 vs. 0.1 Nm/kg; p=0.04). The HT group also had higher peak hip flexion (HT: 65.8°, PT: 53.9°, Control: 55.1°; p≤0.06) and hip sagittal plane excursion (HT: 9.4°, PT: 3.6°, Control: 2.8°; p≤0.05) than the PT and control groups. The HT group had lower peak knee valgus moments than controls (0.05 vs. 1.2 Nm/kg; p=0.01) and a greater range of frontal plane pelvic (8.2 vs. 3.4°; p=0.03) and hip (7.6 vs. 3.0°; p=0.05) motion. The PT group had intermediate values for valgus moment (0.8 Nm/kg) and pelvic (4.9°) and hip (3.3°) excursion. CONCLUSIONS: While both ACLR groups showed reduced GRFs and knee flexion moments compared to controls, the HT group demonstrated greater adaptations proximally with increased hip flexion and frontal plane pelvic and hip excursion. The lower frontal and sagittal plane hip motion in the PT group may be due to anterior knee pain associated with PT grafts. Since the HT group exhibited movement adaptations, but no observable pathologic movement patterns, other factors likely account for the observed higher re-tear rate in HT vs. PT ACLR.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques→French-language works237,207→