MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297464456 · doi:10.3390/app12199767

Fatigue Effects on the Lower Leg Muscle Architecture Using Diffusion Tensor MRI

2022· article· en· W4297464456 on OpenAlexaff
Filipa João, Sérgio Alves, Mário Forjaz Secca, Michael D. Noseworthy, António Veloso

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiffusion MRIMuscle architectureAnatomyBiomedical engineeringChemistryMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proton density (PD) and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) are imaging techniques that enable the acquisition of data from living subjects that can be used in the fine-tuning of subject-specific models’ architectural parameters. The aim of this study was to determine the in vivo 3D architectural parameters (volume, pennation angle, fiber length and physiological cross-sectional area) of the gastrocnemius medialis, gastrocnemius lateralis, soleus and tibialis anterior muscles using proton density and diffusion tensor imaging data before and after an exhaustive one-legged jump exercise. These methods were used in the in vivo 3D data acquisition of six young and physically active female subjects’ lower legs, followed by a fiber-tracking algorithm and analysis tools. No significant differences were found in the muscles’ architecture after the exercise, with the following exceptions: the anatomical cross-section area of the gastrocnemius medialis increased (p-value 0.001, effect size 0.18) after exercise; the fiber lengths of the gastrocnemius medialis, lateralis and soleus muscles were higher after exercise (p-value 0.002, 0.001 and 0.001, respectively, and effect size 2.03, 1.29 and 0.85, respectively); and the soleus mean pennation angle decreased after exercise (p-value 0.0015, effect size 2.31). These changes (or lack thereof) could be attributed to the extended acquisition time of the MRI scans to minimize noise: by increasing the acquisition time, the effect of the exercise may have been partially lost due to muscle recovery.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicSports injuries and preventionFrench-language works237,207