MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133576012 · doi:10.12678/1089-313x.031521g

Body Composition Adaptations Throughout an Elite Circus Student-Artist Training Season

2021· article· en· W3133576012 on OpenAlex
Adam Decker, Patrice Aubertin, Dean Kriellaars

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

VenueJournal of Dance Medicine & Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDiversity and Impact of Dance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioelectrical impedance analysisFat massComposition (language)Muscle massAnimal scienceMedicineBody mass indexPopulationBody fat percentageDemographyInternal medicineBiologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to perform a longitudinal assessment of body composition of circus student-artists in an elite 3-year college training program. Ninety-two student-artists participated (age = 20.39 ± 2.42 years; height = 170.01 ± 8.01 cm; mass = 66.48 ± 11.07 kg; 36% female and 64% male), representing 92% of the student population. Body composi- tion was assessed using multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance at four strategic time points throughout the training year to evaluate changes over the two semesters (September to December and January to April) and winter vacation (December to January). Workloads were subjectively assessed using ratings of perceived exer- tion (RPE). Averaged over the academic terms, fat mass was 11.5 ± 4.8%, muscle mass was 50.2 ± 3.4%, and body mass index was 22.9 ± 2.2. Males and females differed significantly across all absolute and relative body composition variables. Muscle mass increased (semester one, +1.0%, p < 0.001; semester two, +0.4%, p < 0.05) while fat mass decreased during each semester (semester one, -1.6%, p < 0.001; semester two, -0.6%, p < 0.05) co-varying with changes in RPE (semester one, +2.3, p < 0.05; semester two, +1.7, p < 0.05). During the winter vacation period, percent fat mass increased (males, +1.0%; females, +2.0%) and percent muscle mass decreased (males, -0.6%; females, -0.9%). Discipline-specific differences in body composition were also detected, and significant differences were observed between student-artists grouped by years in school. Over the training year, there was a positive adaptation for muscle and fat mass despite the negative adaptation experienced during the winter vacation period.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.335 · 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