Prevalence of Exercise-Induced Arterial Hypoxemia in Healthy Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Exercise-induced arterial hypoxemia (EIAH) is reported to occur in approximately 50% of highly trained male endurance athletes. Few studies have examined EIAH in women and the prevalence remains unclear. It has been reported that some female subjects who develop EIAH possess maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) values that are within 15% of their predicted value. This is unique to women, where EIAH has generally been reported in men who have a high VO2max. The primary objective of this investigation was to determine the prevalence of EIAH in a large female population with a wide range of VO2max values. It was hypothesized that EIAH would occur with a greater prevalence and at relatively lower predicted VO2max than that previously reported in males. METHODS: Young women (N = 52; 26.5 +/- 4.9 yr) performed a cycle test to exhaustion to determine VO2max, and oxyhemoglobin saturation (SaO2) was monitored via pulse oximetry. All subjects were tested during the early follicular phase of their menstrual cycle. A >/= 4% drop in SaO2 represented EIAH. RESULTS: Values for VO2max were variable (VO2max range: 28.0-61.3 mL x kg(-1) x min(-1)). EIAH was present in 67% of the women with N = 19 displaying mild EIAH (92-94%SaO2) and N = 16 displaying moderate EIAH (87-91%SaO2). CONCLUSION: It appears that the prevalence of EIAH in women is slightly greater than the 50% prevalence value that is typically reported for highly fit men.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".