MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of aging and exercise on the tendon

2016· review· en· W2558635730 on OpenAlexfundno aff
René B. Svensson, Katja M. Heinemeier, Christian Couppé, Michael Kjær, S. Peter Magnusson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTendon Structure and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNovo Nordisk FondenNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaLundbeckfondenGovernment of Canada
KeywordsTendonAgeingMuscle hypertrophyGlycationSenescenceChemistryMedicineAnatomyCell biologyBiologyEndocrinologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here, we review the literature on how tendons respond and adapt to ageing and exercise. With respect to aging, there are considerable changes early in life, but this seems to be maturation rather than aging per se. In vitro data indicate that aging is associated with a decreased potential for cell proliferation and a reduction in the number of stem/progenitor-like cells. Further, there is persuasive evidence that turnover in the core of the tendon after maturity is very slow or absent. Tendon fibril diameter, collagen content, and whole tendon size appear to be largely unchanged with aging, while glycation-derived cross-links increase substantially. Mechanically, aging appears to be associated with a reduction in modulus and strength. With respect to exercise, tendon cells respond by producing growth factors, and there is some support for a loading-induced increase in tendon collagen synthesis in humans, which likely reflects synthesis at the very periphery of the tendon rather than the core. Average collagen fibril diameter is largely unaffected by exercise, while there can be some hypertrophy of the whole tendon. In addition, it seems that resistance training can yield increased stiffness and modulus of the tendon and may reduce the amount of glycation. Exercise thereby tends to counteract the effects of aging.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations248
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicTendon Structure and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207