MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Effects Of Ischemic Preconditioning On Adaptations To An Altitude Training Camp In Well-trained Cross-country Skiers

2024· article· en· W4402662942 on OpenAlexaffabout
François Billaut, Laurence Normandin, Pénélope Paradis‐Deschênes

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAltitude trainingTraining (meteorology)Ischemic preconditioningCross countryAltitude (triangle)Physical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineCardiologyGeographyMathematicsMeteorologyIschemiaDemographic economicsEconomicsAthletes

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acclimatization and training at moderate altitude (“live high-train high” paradigm) has been shown to improve sea-level endurance performance in athletes. PURPOSE: To assess whether ischemic preconditioning (IPC) performed prior to an altitude training camp could further enhance maximal aerobic physiology and performance. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial, nineteen competitive cross-country skiers (8 women; group VO2peak 71.2±9.3 ml.kg-1.min-1) performed 6 sessions of IPC (4x5-min occlusions to both legs at 110% arterial occlusion pressure, n=10) or placebo compressions (30% arterial occlusion pressure, n=9) over 7 days immediately before attending a 21-day altitude camp in Park City, Utah (2,200 m) during their pre-competition season. All athletes were from the same team and performed the same supervised training sessions before and during the camp. Primary measure of performance and laboratory outcomes included a 3,000-m track time trial, peak treadmill speed and peak O2 uptake. Freshness/fatigue state was assessed with the Hooper-MacKinnon questionnaire. RESULTS: The change in fatigue state over the camp was similar between groups. VO2peak improved only in IPC (3 ml.kg-1.min-1, 4%, P=0.02). The time to exhaustion in the incremental test also only improved in IPC (15.5 sec, P=0.007), in direct proportion to the increase in VO2peak (r=0.84, P<0.05). The peak treadmill speed improved in IPC (1.1 km.h-1, P=0007) and PLA (0.8 km.h-1, P=0.004), as well as the time to complete the 3,000-m time trial (IPC: 10:32 to 10:27 min:sec, P=0.007; PLA: 10:24 to 10:19 min:sec, P=0.01), without group differences. CONCLUSION: Chronic IPC application enhances the VO2peak gain from an altitude training camp in well-trained skiers, concomitant with a longer time to fatigue. However, the improvement in sea-level running performance does not appear to be majorated by a prior ischemia-reperfusion stimulus in a “live high-train high” paradigm. Ski de Fond Québec

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicCardiovascular and exercise physiology→French-language works237,207→