Efectos del entrenamiento en slackline sobre la resistencia del core y el equilibrio dinámico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Slackline challenges balance by walking on a tensioned strap, where the trunk muscles help to maintain or regain balance. This study aimed to compare a cohort of individuals who regularly practiced slackline and physically inactive individuals on core endurance (CE) and dynamic balance (DB) and to determine whether CE is associated with years of slackline practice. Nine individuals (7 men) who practiced slackline regularly (SG; age= 24.5±3.6 years) and nine physically inactive individuals (7 men) (CG; age= 23.2±3.3 years) were compared. CE was assessed with the McGill battery (trunk flexor, extensor, and side-bridge test) and the plank test. DB was measured with the modified star excursion balance test in stable and unstable conditions. The SG maintained a 36.2% and 45% longer time in left lateral bridge (p=.049) and plank (p=.031), respectively, compared to the CG. The distance achieved in the stable DB test was similar between groups, but in unstable condition was 37.8% greater (p=.016) in SG in both legs and 46.6% greater in the non-dominant leg (p=.039) compared to CG. The SG showed a correlation between years of slackline practice and flexor (r=.674; p=.046), right lateral (r=.765; p=.016) and left (r=.730; p=.026) trunk endurance. In conclusion, those who practice slackline maintain a longer time in the plank and left lateral bridge test and achieve a higher reach distance in unstable DB compared to physically inactive individuals who do not practice slackline.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".