MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Performance trends in individual medley events during FINA World Master Championships from 1986 to 2014

2018· article· en· W2910518129 on OpenAlexaff
Pantelis Τ. Nikolaidis, Beat Knechtle

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society for Exercise Physiology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographyLimitingMedicineAthletesRegression analysisPsychologyMathematicsStatisticsPhysical therapySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Performance trends during the last decades in elite individual medley swimmers are known, but not for age groups swimmers. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to examine participation and performance trends in age groups swimmers competing in FINA World Masters Championships (1986-2014) in individual 200-m and 400-m medley. METHODS: We included all swimmers (6424 women, 7588 men) for each distance and age groups (25-29 to 95-99 years) in the analysis to avoid a selection bias by limiting to a fixed sample (e.g. the ten fastest). Changes in participation and changes in sex difference across editions were analyzed using linear regression models. Changes in performance across editions were analyzed using a mixed-effects regression model with finisher as random variable to consider finishers who completed several races. Sex, distance and calendar year were included as fixed variables. We also considered interaction effects between sex and distance. The men-to-women ratio was compared using a paired t-test. RESULTS: In 200 m, the participation of women increased from 35-39 to 75-79 years and of men from 35-39 to 85-89 years (P<0.05). In 400 m, the participation of women increased from 50-54 to 75-79 years and of men from 60-64 to 85-89 years (P<0.05). From 25-29 to 90-94 years, women and men improved performance in both editions (P<0.05). Men were faster than women from 25-29 to 80-84 years (P<0.05), but not in 85-90 and 90-94 years. Sex and distance showed a significant interaction from 25-29 to 85-89 years (P<0.05), but not in 90-94 years. Women reduced the gap to men in 40-44 and 45-49 years in 200 m, and 40-44 years in 400 m (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In summary, the participation increased in older age groups (>35 years), women and men from 25-29 to 90-94 years improved, and men were faster than women from 25-29 to 80-84 years, but not from 85-89 to 90-94 years. These data suggest that master swimmers will continue to increase participation and improve performance in individual medley. The findings of the present study might help coaches and fitness trainers of medley swimmers to tailor their training programs considering the age of their swimmers.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical FitnessSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207