MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135655516 · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2012-091056

Respiratory health of elite athletes – preventing airway injury: a critical review

2012· review· en· W2135655516 on OpenAlexaff
Pascale Kippelen, Kenneth D. Fitch, Sandra D. Anderson, Valérie Bougault, Louis‐Philippe Boulet, Kenneth W. Rundell, Malcolm Sue‐Chu, Donald C. McKenzie

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory and Cough-Related Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAthletesAirwayAsthmaElite athletesRespiratory systemIntensive care medicinePhysical therapyAnesthesiaImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elite athletes, particularly those engaged in endurance sports and those exposed chronically to airborne pollutants/irritants or allergens, are at increased risk for upper and lower airway dysfunction. Airway epithelial injury may be caused by dehydration and physical stress applied to the airways during severe exercise hyperpnoea and/or by inhalation of noxious agents. This is thought to initiate an inflammatory cascade/repair process that, ultimately, could lead to airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and asthma in susceptible athletes. The authors review the evidence relating to prevention or reduction of the risk of AHR/asthma development. Appropriate measures should be implemented when athletes exercise strenuously in an attempt to attenuate the dehydration stress and reduce the exposure to noxious airborne agents. Environmental interventions are the most important. Non-pharmacological strategies can assist, but currently, pharmacological measures have not been demonstrated to be effective. Whether early prevention of airway injury in elite athletes can prevent or reduce progression to AHR/asthma remains to be established.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations122
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicRespiratory and Cough-Related ResearchFrench-language works237,207