Influence of Antagonistic Hamstring Coactivation on Measurement of Quadriceps Strength in Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is limited understanding of how antagonist muscle coactivation relates to measurement of strength in both individuals with and without knee osteoarthritis (KOA). OBJECTIVE: This study sought to determine whether hamstring coactivation during a maximal quadriceps activation task attenuates net quadriceps strength. DESIGN: Cross-sectional cohort analysis was conducted using data from the 60-month visit of the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study (MOST). SETTING: Laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: A sample of 2328 community-dwelling MOST participants between the ages of 55 and 84 years, with or at elevated risk for KOA, completed the 60-month MOST follow-up visit. Of these, 1666 met inclusion criteria for the current study. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Quadriceps strength; percentage of combined hamstring coactivation (HC), medial HC, and lateral HC. Quadriceps and hamstring strength were assessed using an isokinetic dynamometer. Surface electromyography was used to assess muscle activation patterns. General linear models, adjusted for age, BMI, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grade and study site, modeled the relationship between antagonist hamstring coactivation and quadriceps strength. RESULTS: Men had significantly greater quadriceps strength (P < .001), history of knee injury (P < .001) and surgery (P = .002), and greater presence of varus malalignment (P < .001). Women had greater pain (P < .001) and proportion of KL grade ≥2 (P = .017). Gender-specific analyses revealed combined HC (P = .013) and lateral HC inversely associated with quadriceps strength in women (P = .023) but not in men (combined HC P = .320, lateral HC P = .755). A nonlinear association was detected between quadriceps strength and medial HC. Assessment of quartiles of medial HC revealed the third quartile had reduced quadriceps strength when compared to the lowest quartile of coactivation in both men and women. CONCLUSIONS: Hamstring coactivation attenuates measured quadriceps strength in women with or at elevated risk for KOA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".