Sex differences concerning the effects of ankle muscle fatigue on static postural control and spinal proprioceptive input at the ankle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: The main aim of this study was to determine sex differences in postural control changes with ankle muscle fatigue during a standing forward leaning (FL) task under different vision conditions. The secondary aim was to examine sex differences in the effect of fatigue on soleus (SOL) H-reflex amplitude, a measure of motoneuron excitability with activation of Ia afferents. Methods: Fifteen healthy young adult males (mean age: 28.0 years) and 16 healthy young adult females (mean age: 26.1 years) were asked to perform four consecutive FL tasks [30 s; two with eyes open (EO) and two with eyes closed (EC)] before, and immediately following a fatiguing exercise consisting of alternating ankle plantarflexion (6 s) and dorsiflexion (2 s) maximal isometric contractions, and at 5 and 10 min of recovery. Center of pressure (COP) sway variables (mean position, standard deviation, ellipse area, average velocity, and frequency), an ankle co-contraction index, and a ratio of SOL H-reflex to the maximum amplitude of the compound muscle action potential (M-max) were obtained during the FL tasks. A rating of perceived fatigue (RPF) was also documented at the different time points. Results: < 0.05) in mean COP sway velocity with no significant changes in co-contraction indices. No significant effects of fatigue and related interactions were found for SOL H/M-max ratio. Discussion: The absence of a significant sex difference in postural control change (sway and co-contraction) with fatigue could be explained by similar perceived (RPF) and performance fatigability (exercise duration) between males and females in the present study. Fatigue did not lead to significant changes in SOL spinal motoneuron excitability with activation of Ia afferents.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.005 | 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 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".