Time Motion Analysis and Physiological Profile of Canadian World Cup Wheelchair Basketball Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the time elite wheelchair basketball players spent performing various game activities during a World Cup game, measure the heart rate response during such activity, and describe the physiological profile of each player participating in the game. Six male members of the Canadian World Cup wheelchair basketball team were videotaped during an entire game to determine the time spent performing seven different categories of activity. Time motion analysis indicated that players spent 8.9% of the game time sprinting, 23.5% gliding, 18.2% contesting for ball possession, 0.6% sprinting with the ball, 0.3% shooting, and 48.3% resting on the bench and floor. Twenty percent (20%) of game time was played at an intensity above the ventilatory threshold. The group mean value for peak oxygen uptake during incremental wheelchair exercise on rollers was 2.60L/min and group mean peak 5 and 30 second anaerobic power development on an arm crank ergometer was 486.3 W and 336.8 W, respectively, suggest that training for and playing elite wheelchair basketball induces significant improvement in these tests of fitness.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".