No effect of menstrual cycle phase on eccentric exercise-induced neuromuscular impairments and the magnitude of the repeated bout effect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Neuromuscular function is impaired following an unaccustomed bout of eccentric exercise, however, through the repeated bout effect (RBE) the muscle is protected from damage following a subsequent bout of eccentric exercise. As a result of unaccustomed eccentric contractions, structural muscle damage occurs in both sexes. However, the inflammatory response may be mitigated in females due to estradiol, thereby attenuating the secondary effects of muscle damage and potentially limiting the magnitude of the RBE. We investigated the relationship between menstrual cycle phase and oral contraceptive use on neuromuscular impairments following the first bout of exercise, and the magnitude of the RBE. Thirteen female participants performed two bouts of 150 maximal eccentric voluntary contractions of the elbow flexors four weeks apart. Normally menstruating females participated during the late follicular phase (day 10-14) of their menstrual cycle, as determined through cycle tracking, when estradiol is near peak, and progesterone is lower. Oral contraceptive users were tested on their placebo pill days (lower estradiol). Neuromuscular function was assessed for Bout 1 before the eccentric protocol and then again 48 hours following, and this was repeated 4 weeks later for Bout 2. Eccentric exercise-induced muscle weakness and soreness did not differ between groups following Bout 1 (p=0.885), and the magnitude of the RBE (p<0.05) was similar between groups (p=0.995). Females in the late follicular phase (classified as high estradiol) and females on combined oral contraceptives (low estradiol) had similar impairments in neuromuscular function following the first bout of eccentric exercise, and a similar RBE.
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) | 0.003 | 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".