Oral Hypertonic Saline Is Effective in Reversing Acute Mild-to-Moderate Symptomatic Exercise-Associated Hyponatremia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether oral administration of 3% hypertonic saline (HTS) is as efficacious as intravenous (IV) 3% saline in reversing symptoms of mild-to-moderate symptomatic exercise-associated hyponatremia (EAH) in athletes during and after a long-distance triathlon. DESIGN: Noninferiority, open-label, parallel-group, randomized control trial to IV or oral HTS. We used permuted block randomization with sealed envelopes, containing the word either "oral" or "IV." SETTING: Annual long-distance triathlon (3.8-km swim, 180-km bike, and 42-km run) at Mont-Tremblant, Quebec, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty race finishers with mild to moderately symptomatic EAH. INDEPENDENT VARIABLES: Age, sex, race finish time, and 9 clinical symptoms. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time from treatment to discharge. METHODS: We successfully randomized 20 participants to receive either an oral (n = 11) or IV (n = 9) bolus of HTS. We performed venipuncture to measure serum sodium (Na) at presentation to the medical clinic and at time of symptom resolution after the intervention. RESULTS: The average time from treatment to discharge was 75.8 minutes (SD 29.7) for the IV treatment group and 50.3 minutes (SD 26.8) for the oral treatment group (t test, P = 0.02). Serum Na before and after treatment was not significantly different in both groups. There was no difference on presentation between groups in age, sex, or race finish time, both groups presented with an average of 6 symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Oral HTS is effective in reversing symptoms of mild-to-moderate hyponatremia in EAH.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".