Eucapnic voluntary hyperventilation tests in elite athletes at Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montreal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Since 2001, the International Olympic Committee requires athletes to demonstrate exercise induced bronchospasm (EIB) to be granted the permission to use beta-agonists. Eucapnic voluntary hyperventilation (EVH) has become the test of choice for the diagnosis of EIB but experience with this test is limited. Objective: The aim of this retrospective study is to describe the population of elite athletes who underwent EVH at Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montreal and to identify factors related to a positive result. Methods: 41 elite athletes underwent EVH in our institution from 1/1/2009 to 1/5/2010. Positive tests were compared to negative tests. From 1/1/2011 to 1/2/2011 each athlete was sent a questionnaire to gather further information. Results: 22/41 (54%) tests were positive. 16/25 (64%) aquatic sport (AS) athletes vs 6/16 (38%) non-AS athletes had a positive test (p=0,10). There were no difference between positive and negative tests in mean respiratory rhythm (RR) (66,3breaths/min vs 67,7, p=0,68), tidal volume (TV) (1,43l vs 1,62, p=0,27) and pourcentage of target minute ventilation reached (%TMV) (78,9% vs 83,0%, p=0,22) but there were significant differences in mean minute ventilation per kilogram (MV/kg) (1,48l/kg/min vs 1,63, p=0,04) and age (19,6 vs 22,8, p=0,02). 7/13 (54%) athletes who reported EIB symptoms during sport had a positive test. Conclusions: 54% of elite athletes had a positive EVH test. AS athletes tended to have more positive tests. Symptoms perceived by athletes had a poor positive predictive value. RR, TV and%TMV were not determinants of EVH test result but a younger age and lower MV/kg were related to a positive EVH test.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".