MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132364765 · doi:10.1139/h06-004

Urine specific gravity in exercisers prior to physical training

2006· article· en· W2132364765 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elizabeth A. Stover, Heather Petrie, Dennis H. Passe, Craig A. Horswill, Bob Murray, Robert Wildman

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrine specific gravityMedicineAthletesUrine osmolalityPhysical therapyUrineUrine sampleFluid intakeUrinalysisRecreationPhysical fitnessInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urine specific gravity (USG) is used as an index of hydration status. Many studies have used USG to estimate pre-exercise hydration in athletes. However, very little is known about the pre-exercise hydration status of recreational exercisers. The purpose of the present study was to measure the pre-exercise USG in a large sample of recreational exercisers who attended 2 different fitness centers in the United States. In addition, we wanted to determine if factors such as time of day, geographic location, and gender influenced USG. We tested 166 subjects in Chicago and 163 subjects in Los Angeles. Subjects completed a survey on their typical training regimen and fluid-replacement habits, and thereafter voided and delivered a urine sample to the investigators prior to beginning exercise. Samples were measured on site for USG using a hand-held refractometer. The mean (SD) USG was 1.018 (+/- 0.007) for all subjects. Males had a higher average USG (1.020 +/- 0.007) when compared with females (1.017 +/- 0.008; p = 0.001). Despite differences in climate, no difference in mean USG occurred based on location or time of day. Based on standards used for athletes (USG > or = 1.020), 46% of the exercisers were likely to be dehydrated.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations66
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and MetabolismSame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207