Long-Term Within- and Between-Subject Biological Variation Data of Hematological Parameters in Recreational Endurance Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hematological parameters have many applications in athletes, from monitoring health to uncovering blood doping. This study aimed to deliver biological variation (BV) estimates for 9 hematological parameters by a Biological Variation Data Critical Appraisal Checklist (BIVAC) design in a population of recreational endurance athletes and to assess the effect of self-reported exercise and health-related variables on BV. METHODS: Samples were drawn from 30 triathletes monthly for 11 months and measured in duplicate for hematological measurands on an Advia 2120 analyzer (Siemens Healthineers). After outlier and homogeneity analysis, within-subject (CVI) and between-subject (CVG) BV estimates were delivered (CV-ANOVA and log-ANOVA, respectively) and a linear mixed model was applied to analyze the effect of exercise and other related variables on the BV estimates. RESULTS: CVI estimates ranged from 1.3% (95%CI, 1.2-1.4) for mean corpuscular volume to 23.8% (95%CI, 21.6-26.3) for reticulocytes. Sex differences were observed for platelets and OFF-score. The CVI estimates were higher than those reported for the general population based on meta-analysis of eligible studies in the European Biological Variation Database, but 95%CI overlapped, except for reticulocytes, 23.9% (95%CI, 21.6-26.5) and 9.7% (95%CI, 6.4-11.0), respectively. Factors related to exercise and athletes' state of health did not appear to influence the BV estimates. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first BIVAC-compliant study delivering BV estimates that can be applied to athlete populations performing high-level aerobic exercise. CVI estimates of most parameters were similar to the general population and were not influenced by exercise or athletes' state of health.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".