MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198257163 · doi:10.1177/23259671211026625

Decreased Shoulder and Elbow Joint Loads During the Changeup Compared With the Fastball and Curveball in NCAA Division I Collegiate Softball Pitchers

2021· article· en· W3198257163 on OpenAlexaff
Gretchen D. Oliver, Jessica L. Downs Talmage, Kenzie B. Friesen, Michael G. Saper, Jeffrey R. Dugas

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyElbowThrowingRepeated measures designPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMathematicsAeronauticsStatisticsEngineeringSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Baseball leagues have implemented pitch count and pitch type restrictions based on biomechanical concepts associated with pitch type. Softball has not yet adopted these practices, although softball pitchers continue to pitch at a high volume and learn multiple pitches at a young age. Purpose: To examine shoulder and elbow kinetics between the fastball, curveball, and changeup, as well as to provide descriptive upper extremity pain data in National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) softball pitchers. Study Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Methods: Study participants consisted of 27 female NCAA Division I softball pitchers (age, 20.2 ± 1.9 years; height, 175.7 ± 5.7 cm; weight, 83.6 ± 12.7 kg). The participants pitched 3 balls of each pitch type, and kinetic data were recorded. A one-way within-participants repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance was used to determine significant differences in kinetics and pitch speed between pitch types. Results: Results revealed a statistically significant main effect for pitch type (Wilks λ = .087; F = 36.523; P < .001). Post hoc testing showed that the changeup produced less anterior elbow force compared with the fastball ( P < .001) and the curveball ( P = .012). In addition, the changeup produced less shoulder distraction force compared with the fastball ( P < .001) and the curveball ( P = .001). Additionally, there was a significant difference in pitch speed between all 3 pitch types ( P = .006). The curveball revealed no statistically significant kinetic differences compared with the fastball. Conclusion: The fastball and curveball placed similar stress on the upper extremity in collegiate softball pitchers. However, in comparison with the changeup, the fastball and curveball placed increased stress on the upper extremity. More research is needed to fully explain the differences seen between pitch type and injury risk. Clinical Relevance: Sports medicine professionals, coaches, and athletes should use the current study results to note these differences in shoulder distraction and elbow anterior forces between softball pitch types. The study results can be used as a reference and basis for future research investigating kinetic differences across varying pitch types.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207