Dominant and nondominant leg press training induce similar contralateral and ipsilateral limb training adaptations with children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cross-education has been extensively investigated with adults. Adult studies report asymmetrical cross-education adaptations predominately after dominant limb training. The objective of the study was to examine unilateral leg press (LP) training of the dominant or nondominant leg on contralateral and ipsilateral strength and balance measures. Forty-two youth (10–13 years) were placed (random allocation) into a dominant (n = 15) or nondominant (n = 14) leg press training group or nontraining control (n = 13). Experimental groups trained 3 times per week for 8 weeks and were tested pre-/post-training for ipsilateral and contralateral 1-repetition maximum (RM) horizontal LP, maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) of knee extensors (KE) and flexors (KF), countermovement jump (CMJ), triple hop test (THT), MVIC strength of elbow flexors (EF) and handgrip, as well as the stork and Y balance tests. Both dominant and nondominant LP training significantly (p < 0.05) increased both ipsilateral and contralateral lower body strength (LP 1RM (dominant: 59.6%–81.8%; nondominant: 59.5%–96.3%), KE MVIC (dominant: 12.4%–18.3%; nondominant: 8.6%–18.6%), KF MVIC (dominant: 7.9%–22.3%; nondominant: nonsignificant–3.8%), and power (CMJ: dominant: 11.1%–18.1%; nondominant: 7.7%–16.6%)). The exception was that nondominant LP training demonstrated a nonsignificant change with the contralateral KF MVIC. Other significant improvements were with nondominant LP training on ipsilateral EF 1RM (6.2%) and THT (9.6%). There were no significant changes with EF and handgrip MVIC. The contralateral leg stork balance test was impaired following dominant LP training. KF MVIC exhibited the only significant relative post-training to pretraining (post-test/pre-test) ratio differences between dominant versus nondominant LP cross-education training effects. In conclusion, children exhibit symmetrical cross-education or global training adaptations with unilateral training of dominant or nondominant upper leg.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".