MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203276839 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2021.654231

Resting Tendon Cross-Sectional Area Underestimates Biceps Brachii Tendon Stress: Importance of Measuring During a Contraction

2021· article· en· W3203276839 on OpenAlexafffund
Rowan R. Smart, Brian P. O’Connor, Jennifer M. Jakobi

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTendon Structure and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTendonContraction (grammar)MedicineBicepsAnatomyMuscle contractionBiceps tendonInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Force produced by the muscle during contraction is applied to the tendon and distributed through the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the tendon. This ratio of force to the tendon CSA is quantified as the tendon mechanical property of stress. Stress is traditionally calculated using the resting tendon CSA; however, this does not take into account the reductions in the CSA resulting from tendon elongation during the contraction. It is unknown if calculating the tendon stress using instantaneous CSA during a contraction significantly increases the values of in vivo distal biceps brachii (BB) tendon stress in humans compared to stress calculated with the resting CSA. Nine young (22 ± 1 years) and nine old (76 ± 4 years) males, and eight young females (21 ± 1 years) performed submaximal isometric elbow flexion tracking tasks at force levels ranging from 2.5 to 80% maximal voluntary contraction (MVC). The distal BB tendon CSA was recorded on ultrasound at rest and during the submaximal tracking tasks (instantaneous). Tendon stress was calculated as the ratio of tendon force during contraction to CSA using the resting and instantaneous measures of CSA, and statistically evaluated with multi-level modeling (MLM) and Johnson–Neyman regions of significance tests to determine the specific force levels above which the differences between calculation methods and groups became statistically significant. The tendon CSA was greatest at rest and decreased as the force level increased ( p < 0.001), and was largest in young males (23.0 ± 2.90 mm 2 ) followed by old males (20.87 ± 2.0 mm 2 ) and young females (17.08 ± 1.54 mm 2 ) ( p < 0.001) at rest and across the submaximal force levels. Tendon stress was greater in the instantaneous compared with the resting CSA condition, and young males had the greatest difference in the values of tendon stress between the two conditions (20 ± 4%), followed by old males (19 ± 5%), and young females (17 ± 5%). The specific force at which the difference between the instantaneous and resting CSA stress values became statistically significant was 2.6, 6.6, and 10% MVC for old males, young females, and young males, respectively. The influence of using the instantaneous compared to resting CSA for tendon stress is sex-specific in young adults, and age-specific in the context of males. The instantaneous CSA should be used to provide a more accurate measure of in vivo tendon stress in humans.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysiologySame topicTendon Structure and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207