Effects of Ramadan observance on repeated cycle ergometer sprinting and associated inflammatory and oxidative stress responses in trained young men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: was to assess the effects of Ramadan observance upon repeated sprints and associated inflammatory and oxidative stress responses. Methods: Ten young trained boxers were tested during a control period (C), at the end of the first week (R-1), and during the fourth week of Ramadan observance (R-4). On each occasion, they performed three vertical jumps, 10 x 6 s repeated sprints on a cycle ergometer, followed by three final vertical jumps 1 min after. Surface electrodes measured the EMG activity of the vastus lateralis during jumps performed before and after sprinting. Oxidative stress (malondialdehyde, total antioxidant and catalase), inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein, Interleukin-6 and homocysteine), muscle damage (CPK and LDH) and blood glucose were measured at rest and after completing the exercise protocol. Results: The overall sprint performance was reduced at R-1 compared to C (-6.3 ± 1.2%, p = 0.025), but had recovered by R-4. Jump height decreased after the repeated sprints (p<0.01), without significant changes in EMG parameters. Oxidative stress indices, inflammatory markers, and muscle damage measured after the protocol exercise were unaffected during fasting. Conclusion: The correction of sprint performance may highlight some adaptive responses to fasting. The unchanged of the selected fatigue biomarkers after the repeated sprint protocol suggest that the dietary restriction related to Ramadan is not severe enough to induce significant changes in the metabolism of our trained athletes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".