Stop rebuilding the reading list every term.
Your slides cite papers you can no longer find in your own files. Titrate keeps the literature behind a course organized as topics, so next term starts from what you already built.
Titrate is pre-launch. What is described here is what it is being built to do, with Jeff Casebolt, PhD.
The central question
Does power training (high-velocity/explosive-intent resistance training) reduce fall risk — measured either via functional-capacity/balance surrogate outcomes or via actual fall incidence — more effectively than traditional slow-velocity strength training or general exercise in older adults?
- Orr et al.2006n=112supports
- Sherrington et al.2019n=108 RCTssupports
- El Hadouchi et al.2022n=15 trialssupports
- Jiménez-Lupión et al.2023n=12 studiessupports
- Claudino et al.2021n=5 RCTscontradicts
- Sun et al.2021n=10 RCTsmixed
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.
Course content and your research reading live in two disconnected systems.
You rebuild lecture material each term, and the papers behind it are scattered across a drive, a reference manager and an inbox. Meanwhile students cite whatever ranks first in a search, and you have no clean artifact to model good sourcing against.
A real topic stack
The distinction a cohort will inherit from you, whether you make it or not.
A stack is not a folder. It is a question, with everything read against it assembled underneath — design, sample, and which way each paper cuts. When you teach from a stack, the students can see the same thing you saw.
The central question
Does power training reduce fall risk in older adults more effectively than traditional strength training or general exercise?
| Paper | Year | Design | N | Bears on the question |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Orr et al. | 2006 | RCT | 112 | supports |
| Sherrington et al. (Cochrane) | 2019 | Systematic review / meta-analysis | 108 RCTs / 23,000+ | supports |
| Claudino et al. | 2021 | Systematic review / meta-analysis | 5 RCTs / 543 | contradicts |
| Sun et al. | 2021 | Meta-analysis | 10 RCTs / 648 | mixed |
| El Hadouchi et al. | 2022 | Systematic review / meta-analysis | 15 trials / 583 | supports |
| Jiménez-Lupión et al. | 2023 | Systematic review / meta-analysis | 12 studies / 478 | supports |
4 supporting · 1 contradicting · 1 mixed
What the stack shows that a paragraph cannot
Four of these papers agree that power training beats slower strength training — on Timed Up and Go, on sit-to-stand, on balance scores. Those are surrogates. When the outcome is how many people actually fell, the meta-analysis found comparable relative risk across modalities and said outright that the evidence is scarce and heterogeneous. A stack that is four-to-one in one direction is not a stack that has settled the question, and a student who never sees the one-to-four side never learns to ask which outcome was measured.
A stack that leans four-to-one has not settled anything; it has shown you exactly where the leaning stops. That boundary is the part a cohort inherits, and it is the part a single confident sentence removes.
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
Organize the literature behind a unit as a topic — the papers you already assign, plus whatever a topic search proposes that you judge worth adding. Write the position you actually teach, with the citations attached. Build the course from those positions — and hand students an artifact that shows what defensible sourcing looks like.
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.
Can students use this, or is it just for the instructor?
The workspace is yours. What you publish from it is what students see — that separation is deliberate.
Does it replace my reference manager?
A reference manager stores papers. Titrate is for what you concluded from them and why — the position, with the papers attached to it.
Titrate is pre-launch.
Join the practitioner waitlistOne email when the first practitioner cohort opens. Nothing else.
