Cryostimulation for Post-exercise Recovery in Athletes: A Consensus and Position Paper
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".