Blood Glucose Levels and Performance in a Sports Camp for Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Field Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Acute hypo- and hyperglycemia causes cognitive and psychomotor impairment in individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) that may affect sports performance. Objective. To quantify the effect of concurrent and antecedent blood glucose concentrations on sports skills and cognitive performance in youth with T1DM attending a sports camp. Design/Methods. 28 youth (ages 6-17 years) attending a sports camp carried out multiple skill-based tests (tennis, basketball, or soccer skills) with glucose monitoring over 4 days. Glucose levels at the time of testing were categorized as (a) hypoglycemic (<3.6 mM); (b) within an acceptable glycemic range (3.6-13.9 mM); or (c) hyperglycemic (>13.9 mM). Results. Overall, sports performance skill was approximately 20% lower when glucose concentrations were hypoglycemic compared to either acceptable or hyperglycemic at the time of skill testing (P < .05). During Stroop testing, "reading" and "color recognition" also degraded during hypoglycemia, while "interference" scores improved (P < .05). Nocturnal hypoglycemia was present in 66% of subjects, lasting an average of 84 minutes, but this did not affect sports skill performance the following day. Conclusions. Mild hypoglycemia markedly reduces sports skill performance and cognition in young athletes with T1DM.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".