The prevalence of reversible airway obstruction in professional football players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of reversible airway obstruction in a group of professional football training camp participants. METHODS: All attendees at a Canadian Football League team rookie preseason training camp were invited to participate in a protocol designed to elicit symptoms and signs of reversible airway obstruction (asthma) during the initial preparticipation examination. Those agreeing to the protocol completed a questionnaire containing standardized inquiries about a past history of asthma and the presence of symptoms. Participants then underwent spirometry testing to determine lung function before and after receiving a standardized dose of bronchodilator medication. Players showing evidence of airway obstruction during initial testing and still on the team roster underwent repeat spirometry testing and formal pulmonary function testing during the football season. The follow-up pulmonary function tests were performed to determine those that might benefit from treatment for asthma. RESULTS: Nineteen of 34 (56%) players agreeing to participate had significant reversible airway obstruction as defined by a 12% or greater reversibility in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), and/or forced expiratory flow rate between 25 and 75% of forced vital capacity (FEF 25-75). In most participants, the diagnosis was made on the basis of spirometry alone. Of those testing positive during initial inquiry, 88% remained positive on repeat spirometry, and 73% had reversible airway obstruction during more stringently controlled hospital-based pulmonary function testing. Those players treated for previously undiagnosed asthma noted an improvement in subjective athletic performance during the football season. CONCLUSION: Based on the remarkably high prevalence of undiagnosed asthma in this group, it may prove worthwhile to test elite football players using lung function parameters.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".