Cryostimulation for Post-exercise Recovery in Athletes: A Consensus and Position Paper
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recovery after exercise is a crucial key in preventing muscle injuries and in speeding up the processes to return to homeostasis level. There are several ways of developing a recovery strategy with the use of different kinds of traditional and up-to-date techniques. The use of cold has traditionally been used after physical exercise for recovery purposes. In recent years, the use of whole-body cryotherapy/cryostimulation (WBC; an extreme cold stimulation lasting 1-4 min and given in a cold room at a temperature comprised from -60 to -195°C) has been tremendously increased for such purposes. However, there are controversies about the benefits that the use of this technique may provide. Therefore, the main objectives of this paper are to describe what is whole body cryotherapy/cryostimulation, review and debate the benefits that its use may provide, present practical considerations and applications, and emphasize the need of customization depending on the context, the purpose, and the subject's characteristics. This review is written by international experts from the working group on WBC from the International Institute of Refrigeration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it