MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094298745 · doi:10.1519/ssc.0000000000000605

Optimizing Exercise Selection for the Asymmetric Athlete After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2020· article· en· W3094298745 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStrength and conditioning journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaPan Am Clinic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSquatPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnterior cruciate ligamentAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionReturn to sportMedicinePlyometricsPhysical therapyAthletesAnatomyJump

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Persistent deficits in quadriceps strength occur after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and should be addressed to facilitate safe return to sport. Asymmetric movement patterns that shield the affected knee by shifting demands to the unaffected lower extremity, or other joints within the affected limb, may limit the ability of common strength training exercises to effectively mitigate quadriceps weakness. A multifaceted approach focusing on the early restoration of symmetrical loading during the squat, programming isolated knee extensions, and varying exercise selection to include split-stance positions, such as the split-squat and lunge, may result in the successful restoration of quadriceps strength after ACL reconstruction.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it