Evaluating the Effects of a Novel Neuromuscular Neck Training Device on Multiplanar Static and Dynamic Neck Strength: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Versteegh, TH, Dickey, JP, Emery, CA, Fischer, LK, MacDermid, JC, and Walton, DM. Evaluating the effects of a novel neuromuscular neck training device on multiplanar static and dynamic neck strength: A pilot study. J Strength Cond Res 34(3): 708-716, 2020-The neck serves an important function in damping the transference of acceleration forces between the head and the trunk, such as that occurring during contact sports or motor vehicle collisions. An inability to adequately dissipate forces has been proposed as a potential mechanism for clinical conditions such as whiplash or concussion, but current approaches to neck training may not be targeting the correct mechanisms. The purpose of this study was to explore the training effect of a novel neuromuscular strengthening protocol on dynamic and static neck strength. This was a quasiexperimental pilot study design with intervention (n = 8) and control (n = 10) groups. The intervention group was trained (twice/week, ∼10 minutes, for 7 weeks) on a training device that uses self-generated centripetal force to create a dynamic rotational resistance. This protocol is intended to target the ability of the neck muscles to perform coordinated multiplanar plyometric contractions. Both groups also continued with traditional neck strengthening that included training on a straight-plane, isotonic, 4-way neck machine. Performance on the training device showed improvement after routine practice within 1 week, as evidenced by a trend toward increased peak speed in revolutions per minute (RPM). After 7 weeks, peak RPM increased from 122.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.3-154.4) to 252.3 (95% CI, 241.5-263.1). There was also a large positive effect size (Hedge's d, 0.68) in isometric composite (multiplane) neck strength favoring the intervention group over the control group (difference, 20 N; 95% CI, -8 to 48). The largest magnitude strength improvement in a single plane was in axial rotation and also favored the intervention group over the control group (Hedge's d, 1.24; difference, 46 N; 95% CI, 9-83). Future studies should explore whether the dynamic training presented here could help reduce the risk of sports concussion, whiplash, or other head-neck trauma.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".