MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409219709 · doi:10.1249/jsr.0000000000001241

Air Pollution and Its Effects on Sports and Exercise: A Narrative Review of Impacts and Mitigation Strategies

2025· review· en· W4409219709 on OpenAlexaff
Keifer P. Walsh, Peyton A. Tharp, Katherine Kiley, Michael S. Koehle

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Sports Medicine Reports · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiorespiratory fitnessRecreationAthletesMedicineNarrative reviewEnvironmental healthDisadvantagedPopulationAir pollutionSports medicineApplied psychologyEnvironmental planningPhysical therapyEnvironmental sciencePsychologyIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Air pollution presents a growing, significant threat to health among the general population. Athletes and individuals participating in recreational exercise are particularly vulnerable due to increased ventilation during physical activity. The detrimental impacts of various pollutants on cardiorespiratory function, cognition, and sport-specific metrics have been investigated. Therefore, focus within the sports community has shifted to both personal and organizational strategies to mitigate or even prevent these effects. Limited evidence supports reducing exposure time and proximity, transition to indoor activity, precompetition acclimation, monitoring air quality when choosing location, and the use of masks and supplements. In addition, special considerations should be made for the unique exposures and challenges faced by populations, such as warfighters, para-athletes, or those living in disadvantaged communities. There remains a need for detailed and evidence-driven guidelines on air pollution for those participating in sports.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.356 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Sports Medicine ReportsSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207