MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6990113928

Comparative analysis of equipment-free tasks for biomechanical assessment: identifying optimal replacement of drop vertical jump in evaluating anterior cruciate ligament injury risk

2024· dissertation· en· W6990113928 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEmovi
KeywordsAnterior cruciate ligamentBiomechanicsACL injuryVertical jumpDrop (telecommunication)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knee kinematics during a drop vertical jump (DVJ) have been associated with a heightened susceptibility to non-contact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury.Females and those with a history of ACL injury constitute a vulnerable population.While various equipment-free tasks exist to evaluate the factors linked to ACL injury or reinjury risk, the clinical significance of these tests remains to be determined.The study aims to distinguish biomechanical differences between sexes and between healthy and post-ACL reconstruction (ACLR) cohorts and establish the clinical relevance of equipmentfree tasks.Marker-based motion captures were collected from 20 healthy athletes and 20 ACLR participants.Knee flexion and adduction angles were obtained during a DVJ, a tuck jump assessment, a single-leg squat, and a single-leg hop.Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to analyze the correlation between the DVJ and various equipment-free tasks.A two-way ANOVA and Cohen's d were used to explore between-group variations and the magnitude of their effect sizes.Significant differences between sexes in knee flexion angle (effect size range, d=0.60 to d=1.14) and knee adduction angle (effect size range, d=0.37 to d=1.60) were observed during a DVJ and a single-leg hop.A significant ACL status effect was detected only for initial contact knee adduction in the non-study limb for the DVJ (effect size range, d=0.40 to d=0.75) and the study limb for the singleleg hop (effect size range, d= 0.71 to d=1.03).The tuck jump assessment exhibited significant sex-based differences only in knee adduction angle (effect size range, d= 0.71 to d = 1.72); additionally, a significant ACL status effect was observed for peak knee adduction in the non-study limb (effect size, d= 0.74).Significant sex-based differences during a single-leg squat were only present for peak knee flexion and peak knee adduction angles (effect size range, d= 0.78 to d=1.60).The single-leg squat did not reveal an ACL-status effect.There was a statistically significant, moderate correlation between the DVJ, single-leg squat, and single-leg hop for peak knee flexion angles.The correlation for peak knee

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)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques→French-language works237,207→