Impact of partitioning exercises on quadriceps muscle endurance and muscle fiber-type distribution following low-load/high-repetition resistance training (LLHR-RT) in people with advanced COPD.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the effect of 8 weeks of single-limb (SL) or two-limb (TL) LLHR-RT on quadriceps muscle endurance and fiber type distribution of the vastus lateralis muscle in fourteen participants (age: 65±7 years, FEV1 :39±10 % predicted) with COPD. A fiber typing analysis was performed using the immunofluorescence method, expressing the percentage of Type I, Type IIa and type IIx fibers. Within the LLHR-RT program (seven exercises in total), the knee extension exercise targeted the quadriceps muscle. Three sets were performed per session (3 sessions/week) with each set ending with task failure. Quadriceps muscle endurance was assessed by comparing the amount of work performed between the first versus the last knee extension exercise session. Results are shown in Table 1. Conclusion: Eight weeks of SL LLHR-RT training improves quadriceps muscle endurance but does not result in statistically significant alterations in fiber type distribution, the latter thus indicating that the improvement in quadriceps function is likely more related to neural than muscular adaptations.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".