The Influence of Growth and Maturation on Stretch-Shortening Cycle Function in Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hopping, skipping, jumping and sprinting are common tasks in both active play and competitive sports. These movements utilise the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC), which is considered a naturally occurring muscle action for most forms of human locomotion. This muscle action results in more efficient movements and helps optimise relative force generated per motor unit recruited. Innate SSC development throughout childhood and adolescence enables children to increase power (jump higher and sprint faster) as they mature. Despite these improvements in physical performance, the underpinning mechanisms of SSC development during maturational years remain unclear. To the best of our knowledge, a comprehensive review of the potential structural and neuromuscular adaptations that underpin the SSC muscle action does not exist in the literature. Considering the importance of the SSC in human movement, it is imperative to understand how neural and structural adaptations throughout growth and maturation can influence this key muscle action. By understanding the factors that underpin functional SSC development, practitioners and clinicians will possess a better understanding of normal development processes, which will help differentiate between training-induced adaptations and those changes that occur naturally due to growth and maturation. Therefore, the focus of this article is to identify the potential underpinning mechanisms that drive development of SSC muscle action and to examine how SSC function is influenced by growth and maturation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".