Hydration status of rugby league players during home match play throughout the 2008 Super League season
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hydration status of rugby league players during competitive home match play was assessed throughout the 2008 Super League season. Fourteen players from 2 Super League clubs were monitored (72 observations). On arrival, 2 h prior to kick off, following normal prematch routines, players' body mass were measured following a urine void. Prematch fluid intake, urine output, and osmolality were assessed until kick off, with additional measurements at half time. Fluid intake was also monitored during match play for club B only, and final measurements of variables were made at the end of the match. Mean body mass loss per match was 1.28 ± 0.7 kg (club A, 1.15 kg; club B, 1.40 kg), which would equate to an average level of dehydration of 1.31% (mass loss, assumed to be water loss, expressed as a percentage of body mass), with considerable intra-individual coefficient of variation (CV, 47%). Mean fluid intake for club B was 0.64 ± 0.5 L during match play, while fluid loss was 2.0 ± 0.7 L, with considerable intra-individual CV (51% and 34%, respectively). Mean urine osmolality was 396 ± 252 mosm·kg-1 on arrival, 237 ± 177 mosm·kg-1 prematch, 315 ± 133 mosm·kg-1 at half time, and 489 ± 150 mosm·kg-1 postmatch. Body mass losses were primarily a consequence of body fluid losses not being completely balanced by fluid intake. Furthermore, these data show that there is large inter- and intra-individual variability of hydration across matches, highlighting the need for future assessment of individual relevance.
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 | 0.000 | 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".