Side differences of upper quarter Y balance test performance in sub-elite young male and female handball players with different ages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Handball is characterised by repetitive passing and shooting actions mainly performed with the throwing arm. This can lead to side differences (inter-limb asymmetry) in upper quarter mobility/stability between the throwing and non-throwing arm, which could even increase with advancing age (i.e., playing experience). However, side differences in upper quarter mobility/stability is associated with an increased musculoskeletal injury risk. Therefore, we assessed side differences in upper quarter mobility/stability in young handball players at different ages using a cross-sectional study design. Methods Upper Quarter Y Balance test performance of the throwing and non-throwing arm was assessed in 190 sub-elite young female and male handball players (13–18 years). Per arm, relative maximal reach distances (% arm length) for all three directions (i.e., medial, inferolateral, superolateral) and the composite score (CS) were calculated and used for an age × side analysis of variance. Additionally, partial eta-squared (ηp2) was calculated as an effect size measure. Results Irrespective of measure, statistically significant main effects of age (except for the composite score) and side but no statistically significant age × side interaction effects were detected. Further, limb asymmetry in the inferolateral reach direction was above the injury-related cut-off value (i.e., ≥ 7.75% arm length) in 13- and 14-year-olds but not in the older players. Conclusion The detection of limb asymmetry above the proposed injury-related cut-off value in younger players (13- and 14-year-olds) but not in older players (15- to 18-year-olds) may be indicative for an increased injury risk for the younger age group. Thus, prevention programs should be implemented in the handball training routine, especially for the younger ones.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".