MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206157364 · doi:10.1177/23259671211067828

Peak Elbow Flexion Does Not Influence Peak Shoulder Distraction Force or Ball Velocity in NCAA Division I Softball Pitchers

2022· article· en· W4206157364 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole M. Bordelon, Kenzie B. Friesen, Anthony Fava, Hillary A. Plummer, Gretchen D. Oliver

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElbowMedicineDistractionThrowingOrthodonticsBall (mathematics)Elbow flexionBiomechanicsPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMathematicsAnatomyPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: High shoulder distraction force has been observed in softball pitchers during the acceleration phase (top of the pitch to ball release) of a pitch. Increasing elbow flexion may reduce shoulder forces and the susceptibility to pain by shortening the lever arm of the throwing arm. Purpose: To determine the association of peak elbow flexion during the acceleration phase of the pitch with peak shoulder distraction force and ball velocity. Study Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Methods: A total of 61 female collegiate softball pitchers (mean age, 19.9 ± 1.9 years; mean height, 175.7 ± 5.7 cm; mean weight, 83.6 ± 12.7 kg; 49 right-handed) volunteered for this study. Biomechanical data were collected with a 3-dimensional electromagnetic tracking system while the pitchers threw 3 maximal-effort fastballs at a regulation distance. Peak elbow flexion and peak shoulder distraction force were calculated for the acceleration phase and averaged across the 3 trials. Ball velocity was assessed with a radar gun. Results: Simple linear regression analyses indicated that peak elbow flexion did not influence peak shoulder distraction force during the acceleration phase of the pitch ( F(1,59) = 2.412; P = .126), with R 2 = 0.023. Additionally, peak elbow flexion during the acceleration phase of the pitch did not influence ball velocity ( F(1,59) = 2.435; P = .124), with R 2 = 0.023. A bivariate correlation analysis showed a significant association between ball velocity and shoulder distraction force ( R 2 = 0.343; P = .007) in which ball velocity constituted approximately 34% of the variance in shoulder distraction force. Conclusion: Peak elbow flexion did not influence ball velocity or peak shoulder distraction force during the acceleration phase of a windmill softball pitch. However, there was a significant and positive relationship between ball velocity and peak shoulder distraction force. These results may indicate that ball velocity and other kinematic variables may be more related to shoulder distraction force than elbow flexion. Clinical Relevance: Increasing elbow flexion can shorten the lever arm, but it did not reduce shoulder distraction force or increase ball velocity. Therefore, elbow flexion may be more useful as a description of the pitching style rather than a single measure related to increased performance or the risk of injuries. Future research should continue to examine the relationship between other kinematic parameters with shoulder distraction force.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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