COVID-19 Test Before Tokyo2020 Paralympic Games: An Implemented Protocol to Protect Paralympic Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives The COVID-19 pandemic represents a difficult challenge for the whole of humanity. Sports, in which contact between athletes is essential, became impossible to practice without the risk of viral spread. Athletes of the national teams are a particular subgroup of the population for whom there is an important need for protection and the implementation of targeted preventive measures. The present report describes the protocol that was developed to answer the urgent protection need for athletes during COVID-19 pandemic. The protocol aimed at demonstrating the feasibility of a rigid prevention intervention to prevent outbreaks and infections in terms of COVID-19 as well as in other potential future pandemics from pathogens with similar path of transmission. Methods The study was conducted in rowing para-thletes training of the Paralympic Games in Tokyo2020. It was designed to create an anti-COVID-19 “protection bubble” with the aim to isolate para-athletes and their technical support team during pre-Olympic retreats. The “bubble” development relied on a carefully conducted protocol of repeated antigen and molecular COVID-19 tests on nasal and oropharyngeal fluids among all participants carried out before, during and at the end of each retreat. Results During the 10 months of protocol implementation there were no COVID-19 outbreaks among the para-athletes and technical personnel during the retreats. In total, 552 PCR tests and 298 antigen-based tests were performed for an average number of 42 test per athlete. The number of retreat participants was larger (n = 23) in the beginning of the year due to the Paralympic selection rounds and smaller at the end of the study period (n = 12). Conclusion The protocol has indicated that it is possible to implement an anti-COVID-19 protection protocol where athletes and technical staff can train and compete in safe conditions. The study showed that it is feasible to implement a rigid prevention protocol for athletes and technical staff based on repeated COVID-19 antigenic and molecular tests for a long period of training with excellent participation and compliance.
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 | 0.014 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
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".