Inter-Segment Coordination of Male and Female Collegiate Ice Hockey Players During Forward Skating Starts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Coordination in ice hockey skating has been minimally investigated, particularly in females. The objective was to compare lower-extremity inter-segment coordination of collegiate male and female ice hockey players during forward skating starts. Methods: 3D kinematic data were collected on collegiate male (n = 9) and female (n = 10) participants during accelerative steps. Continuous relative phase (CRP) was calculated for shank-sagittal/thigh-sagittal, shank-sagittal/thigh-frontal, and foot-sagittal/shank-sagittal segment pairs across 2.5 strides on each side. Principal component analysis (PCA) extracted features of greatest variability of the CRP and relationships between principal components and sex were investigated using hierarchical linear model. Results: Males demonstrated more out-of-phase coordination (higher CRP) for side one (p = .01) and side two (p < .01) shank-sagittal/thigh-sagittal as well as side one shank-sagittal/thigh-frontal (p < .01) segment pairs throughout each step. Females demonstrated a greater change in CRP from late stance/early swing to late swing/early stance on side two for shank-sagittal/thigh-frontal segments (p < .01). For side two shank-sagittal/thigh-frontal segments, faster males utilized more out-of-phase coordination throughout each step whereas faster females utilized more in-phase coordination (p < .01). Conclusion: Males and females may employ different coordinative strategies to achieve faster skating speeds. Males tend to utilize more out-of-phase coordination of the shank and thigh throughout strides, although coordinative differences of the shank and foot were not found between sexes. Further investigation is needed to examine the relationship between lower limb strength and coordination as well as the effect of targeted training protocols on lower extremity coordinative patterns.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".