MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551643069 · doi:10.5604/20831862.1224098

Rapid weight loss in the context of Ramadan observance: recommendations for judokas

2016· review· en· W2551643069 on OpenAlex
Asma Aloui, Hamdi Chtourou, Walid Briki, Montassar Tabben

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of Sport · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDietary Effects on Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersWorld Anti-Doping Agency
KeywordsWeight lossContext (archaeology)Perceived exertionMoodMedicineAthletesBody weightPhysical therapyWeight gainPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationObesityEndocrinologyHeart rateClinical psychologyBlood pressureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Judo is a weight-classified combat sport, and many athletes seek to compete at the lightest possible weight category to gain an advantage from competing against shorter/smaller, and supposedly weaker opponents. To achieve a desired weight, most judokas opt for rapid weight loss techniques. Short-duration maximal efforts are not greatly affected by "making weight", but prolonged and/or repeated exercise is significantly impaired. Negative effects on mood, ratings of perceived exertion, and cognitive function are also reported. Moreover, rapid weight loss reduces maximal cardiac output and glycogen stores, and impairs thermo-regulation. Limited empirical data suggest that Ramadan reduces judokas' performance, and this is likely to be exacerbated by attempts at rapid weight loss. Weight reduction during Ramadan tends to be counterproductive, and judokas who aim for a lower weight category are advised to attempt any desired reduction of body mass during the weeks leading up to Ramadan, rather than during the holy month.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.295 · 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