The Effect of 8-Week Nordic Hamstring Exercise on Hamstring Quadriceps Ratio and Hamstring Muscle Strength
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study is to investigate the effect of 8-week Nordic Hamstring (NH) exercise on hamstring/quadricepsratio (H/Q) and hamstring muscle strength. 22 amateur soccer players participated in the study. Soccer players weredivided into two groups: the control group (CG) (n = 11) who only practiced soccer training and the NordicHamstring exercise group (NHEG) (n = 11) who performed NH in addition to soccer training. The isokinetic kneemuscle strength of the soccer player was measured twice at the beginning of the study and after the 8 week NHexercise. An isokinetic dynamometer was used to determine isokinetic knee strengths of soccer players. Thedifference between pre-test and post-test results of isokinetic knee muscle strength of soccer players was determinedby Wilcoxon test. According to the results obtained, it was found that the H/Q ratio (at 180ºs-1 and 240ºs-1 angularvelocities) and hamstring muscle strength (60ºs-1, 180ºs-1 and 240ºs-1 angular velocities) increased statisticallysignificantly (p<0.05). As a result, it can be stated that NH exercise is a very important factor in achieving thedesired level of H/Q ratio, which is an important factor in increasing sportive performance and thus decreasing therisk of injury as well as increasing hamstring muscle strength.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".