MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125941371 · doi:10.1136/bjsm.34.4.273

Bone mineral density and serum testosterone in chronically trained, high mileage 40–55 year old male runners

2000· article· en· W2125941371 on OpenAlexaff
K. J. MacKelvie, Jack Taunton, Heather McKay, K M Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBone mineralTestosterone (patch)MedicineEndocrinologyPhysical therapyPhysiologyInternal medicineOsteoporosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To identify physical activity that is beneficial for the maintenance of bone strength with increasing age by examining the relation between bone mineral density (BMD) and chronic endurance training in men. BMD at the proximal femur, its subregions, and the lumbar spine, and serum testosterone were compared between two groups of long distance runners with more than 20 years of training experience and non-athletic controls. METHODS: Runners (n = 12) were divided into (a) high volume runners (n = 7), running 64-80 km a week, and (b) very high volume runners (n = 5), running more than 95 km a week, and compared with non-athletic male controls, exercising in non-endurance oriented activities two to four times a week. BMD (g/cm2) at the total proximal femur, femoral neck, trochanteric region, and lumbar spine was measured by dual energy x ray absorptiometry. Total testosterone (nmol/l) and free testosterone (pmol/l) in serum were measured by radioimmunoassay from single fasting blood samples. RESULTS: Height, weight, and age (range = 40-55 years) were not significantly different between groups. The high volume runners had significantly higher BMD at the total proximal femur (1.09 (0.17) v 0.94 (0.056)), femoral neck (0.91 (0.16) v 0.78 (0.071)), and trochanteric region (0.85 (0.14) v 0.73 (0.053)) than controls (p<0.05). The differences in BMD for the proximal femur between the very high volume runners and the other two groups were not significant. There was no difference in lumbar spine BMD, total testosterone, or free testosterone between groups. However, there was a significant negative correlation between total testosterone (r = -0.73, p<0.01) and free testosterone (r = -0.79, p<0.005) and running volume in the distance runners. CONCLUSIONS: Long term distance running with training volumes less than 80 km a week had a positive effect on BMD of the proximal femur. With running volumes greater than 64 km a week, training was inversely related to testosterone levels, but levels remained within the normal range.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations56
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207