Association Between Years of Competition and Shoulder Function in Collegiate Swimmers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Shoulder injuries are common among competitive swimmers, and the progression of shoulder pathology is not well understood. The objective of this study was to assess the extent to which years of competitive swim training were associated with physical properties of the supraspinatus muscle and tendon, shoulder strength, and self-reported assessments of shoulder pain and function. HYPOTHESIS: Increasing years of competition will be associated with declining physical properties of the supraspinatus muscle/tendon and declining self-reported assessments of pain and function. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive epidemiology study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4. METHODS: After institutional approval, 18 collegiate female swimmers enrolled in the study. For each swimmer, supraspinatus tendon thickness was measured; tendinosis was assessed using ultrasound imaging, supraspinatus muscle shear wave velocity was assessed using shear wave elastography, isometric shoulder strength was measured using a Biodex system, and self-reported assessments of pain/function were assessed using the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) score. All subjects were tested before the start of the collegiate swim season. Linear regression was used to assess the association between years of competition and the outcome measures. RESULTS: Years of participation was positively associated with tendon thickness ( P = 0.01) and negatively associated with shear wave velocity ( P = 0.04) and WORC score ( P < 0.01). Shoulder strength was not associated with years of participation ( P > 0.39). CONCLUSION: Long-term competitive swim training is associated with declining measures of supraspinatus muscle/tendon properties and self-reported measures of pain and function. Although specific injury mechanisms are still not fully understood, these findings lend additional insight into the development of rotator cuff pathology in swimmers. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Lengthy swimming careers may lead to a chronic condition of reduced mechanical properties in the supraspinatus muscle and tendon, thereby increasing the likelihood of rotator cuff pathology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".