MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Relationship Between Hemoglobin And VO2max: A Systematic Review And Meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4387056052 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin L. Webb, Ellen K. Gorman, Olaf H. Morkeberg, Stephen A. Klassen, Riley J. Regimbal, Chad C. Wiggins, Michael J. Joyner, Shane M. Hammer, Jonathon W. Senefeld

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemoglobinHematocritMeta-analysisObservational studyMedicineVO2 maxInternal medicineConfidence intervalBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: There is widespread agreement about the key role of hemoglobin for oxygen transport. Both observational and interventional studies have examined the relationship between hemoglobin levels and maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O2max) in humans. However, some uncertainty remains. Thus, we examined the relationship between hemoglobin levels (hemoglobin concentration and hemoglobin mass) and V̇O2max (absolute and relative V̇O2max) among both observational and interventional studies. METHODS: A systematic search was performed on December 6th, 2021. The study procedures and reporting of findings followed PRISMA guidelines. Article selection and data abstraction were performed in duplicate by two independent reviewers. Primary outcomes were hemoglobin levels and V̇O2max values (absolute and relative). For observational studies, meta-regression models were used to examine the relationship between hemoglobin levels and V̇O2max values. For interventional studies, meta-analysis models were used to determine the change in V̇O2max values (standard paired difference) associated with interventions designed to modify hemoglobin levels or V̇O2max. Meta-regression models were performed to determine the relationship between a change in hemoglobin levels and the change in V̇O2max values. All results are presented as the Mean Slope Coefficient [95% Confidence Interval]. RESULTS: For observational data (226 studies), there was a positive association between absolute V̇O2max and hemoglobin levels (hemoglobin concentration; 0.404 [0.298, 0.510], hemoglobin mass; 0.005 [0.003, 0.007], and hematocrit; 0.146 [0.091, 2.000], (P < 0.001 for all)). Subgroup analyses demonstrated no sex-related differences among these relationships. For interventional data (158 studies), there was a positive association between the change of absolute V̇O2max (standard paired difference) and the change in hemoglobin levels (hemoglobin concentration (P < 0.0001) and hemoglobin mass (P = 0.006)). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that V̇O2max values are closely associated with hemoglobin levels among both observational and interventional studies. Although our findings suggest a lack of sex differences in these relationships, there were limited studies incorporating females or stratifying results by biological sex.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.037
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→French-language works237,207→