Age-related performance fatigability: a comprehensive review of dynamic tasks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adult aging is associated with a myriad of changes within the neuromuscular system, leading to reductions in contractile function of old adults. One of the consequences of these age-related neuromuscular adaptations is altered performance fatigability, which can limit the ability of old adults to perform activities of daily living. Whereas age-related fatigability during isometric tasks has been well characterized, considerably less is known about fatigability of old adults during dynamic tasks involving movement about a joint, which provides a more functionally relevant task compared with static contractions. This review provides a comprehensive summary of age-related fatigability during dynamic contractions, where the importance of task specificity is highlighted with a brief discussion of the potential mechanisms responsible for differences in fatigability between young and old adults. The angular velocity of the task is critical for evaluating age-related fatigability, as tasks that constrain angular velocity (i.e., isokinetic) produce equivocal age-related differences in fatigability, whereas tasks involving unconstrained velocity (i.e., isotonic-like) consistently induce greater fatigability for old compared with young adults. These unconstrained velocity tasks, which are more closely associated with natural movements, offer an excellent model to uncover the underlying age-related mechanisms of increased fatigability. Future work evaluating the mechanisms of increased age-related fatigability during dynamic tasks should be evaluated using contraction modes that are specific to the task (i.e., dynamic), rather than isometric, particularly for the assessment of spinal and supra spinal components. Advancing our understanding of age-related fatigability is likely to yield novel insights and approaches for improving mobility limitations in old adults.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".