Your programming is defensible. Your sources should be too.
You read the study, you changed the block, and six weeks later a parent asks why. Titrate keeps the paper attached to the position, so the answer takes a minute instead of an evening.
Titrate is pre-launch. What is described here is what it is being built to do, with Jeff Casebolt, PhD.
The central question
Does passing objective return-to-sport (RTS) criteria/test batteries (strength symmetry limb-symmetry indices, hop tests, time-based thresholds, etc.) before returning to sport reduce an athlete's risk of a second ACL injury (graft rupture or contralateral tear)?
- Grindem et al.2016n=106supports
- Kyritsis et al.2016n=158supports
- Webster et al.2019n=—mixed
- Losciale et al.2019n=4 studies po…contradicts
- Zhou et al.2024n=9 studiesmixed
- Paterno et al.2022n=159contradicts
A workbench, not a chatbot.
Nothing here writes a confident paragraph for you to trust. There is no chat window. You keep the judgment; the tool keeps the trail back to the papers. It cannot hallucinate a citation because it does not generate citations at all — a claim points at a paper already sitting in your own library, or it points at nothing.
You already do the reading. You just can't produce it on demand.
The study that changed your mind is in a screenshot, a saved post, or nowhere. When a parent, an athletic director, or a skeptical athlete pushes back, you are reconstructing a rationale from memory — and the reconstruction is never as good as the original thinking.
A real topic stack
This is what a stack looks like when the evidence disagrees.
A stack is not a folder. It is a question, with everything you have read that bears on it assembled underneath — carrying what you actually judge a paper by: what kind of study it was, how many people were in it, and which way it cuts.
The central question
Does the barbell hip thrust produce superior gluteus maximus development — measured either as acute EMG activation or as chronic hypertrophy — compared to the back squat?
| Paper | Year | Design | N | Bears on the question |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contreras et al. | 2015 | Cross-sectional EMG | 13 | supports |
| Delgado et al. | 2019 | Cross-sectional EMG | 8 | mixed |
| Vigotsky et al. | 2017 | Methodological commentary | — | contradicts |
| Plotkin et al. | 2023 | RCT — MRI-measured hypertrophy | 34 | contradicts |
| Kassiano et al. | 2024 | RCT — ultrasound thickness | 33 | supports |
| Krause Neto et al. | 2025 | Systematic review / meta-analysis | 12 studies | mixed |
2 supporting · 2 contradicting · 2 mixed
What the stack shows that a paragraph cannot
The measure that is easy to take and the measure that matters point different ways. Surface EMG favours the hip thrust. The one trial that randomised people to nine weeks of training and measured actual gluteal growth by MRI found the two exercises came out statistically similar. And the commentary arguing you cannot infer muscle growth from EMG amplitude at all is co-authored by several of the people who ran the original EMG comparisons.
Titrate does not resolve this for you. There is no summary at the bottom of this stack, no confidence score and no verdict. The disagreement is the finding, and it stays on the screen where you can argue with it.
Every paper listed here is real and independently re-verified on 2 August 2026 against PubMed, PMC, the DOI resolver, Unpaywall and an open citation-graph API. The screen is not. Titrate is pre-launch, and the topic-stack view is designed, not built — this is the specification, shown with real material rather than mocked up. Labelling how a paper bears on the question is a design commitment, not a shipped feature, and it is not what makes Titrate different.
What Titrate does about it
Bring the papers you already read — or start from a topic and have Titrate propose candidates you keep or drop. Group them into the topics you actually coach: intent, velocity, return-to-play, in-season maintenance. Draft a position with the citations attached to it, and reuse that position every time the question comes back.
What a Titrate workspace holdsMixed evidence stays mixed.
Supporting and contradicting work is kept where you can see both. Titrate is being built so a position never quietly resolves a disagreement the literature has not resolved.
How evidence is handledTitrate is being built with Jeff Casebolt, PhD — a biomechanist with five peer-reviewed publications, who has been through peer review himself.
About Jeff and why this existsQuestions
Is that stack included, or do I have to build my own?
You build your own. The stack above is a specimen — assembled from published literature to show the shape of the thing, not shipped as content you subscribe to. Titrate can help you find candidates on a topic; what it will not do is curate a reading list or tell you which papers matter. It proposes, you dispose. If it decided for you, you would be reading someone else's review again, which is the exact position this is meant to get you out of.
Do I need to be an academic to use this?
No. Titrate assumes you read applied research, not that you produce it. The workflow is: keep the papers, group them by the topic you coach, write down what you concluded and why.
What if the research disagrees with what I already do?
Then you have found something worth knowing. Titrate does not resolve disagreement for you — it keeps the disagreeing papers visible next to each other so the position you write is one you can actually defend.
I pay for a research review specifically because there is no AI in it. Why would I use software?
That is a reasonable position and it is close to the one this is built on. Nothing in Titrate reads a paper for you, summarises it for you, or writes your position. There is no chat window and no generated paragraph anywhere in it — the judgment is human, it is just yours instead of an editorial team's. What the software does is the clerical half: hold the papers, keep a question attached to them, and keep every claim's citation on the record itself rather than in a second app you have to remember to update.
Titrate is pre-launch.
Join the practitioner waitlistOne email when the first practitioner cohort opens. Nothing else.
