Reliability of Capillary Blood Gas Measurements in Paralympic Sprinters at Rest: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Sports scientists have increasingly used point-of-care methods for training load management, and blood gas analysis has shown promise in this area. However, the reproducibility of this method in high-performance athletes remains unproven. Objective: The aim of this study was to verify the reliability of acid-base variables at rest in high-performance Paralympic sprinters. Methods: Seven athletes participated, including four with visual impairments (class T12 and T13) and three with physical impairments. Approximately 500 µL of capillary blood was obtained from the fingertip and analyzed in triplicate (Samples 1, 2, and 3) using the Epoc System® (Ottawa, ON, Canada) to measure pH, carbonic dioxide partial pressure (pCO2), bicarbonate ion (HCO3−), base excess (BE), hematocrit (Hct), hemoglobin concentration (Hb), creatinine (CRE), and urea concentration (URE). Results: No differences were found for any parameter (p > 0.05). The imprecision of the method ranged from 0.1% for blood pH to 6.1% for BE. Pearson’s analysis showed strong and significant relationships between all variables analyzed (p < 0.05). The degree of consistency among samples also indicated excellent reliability of measurements, ranging from 0.88 for Hb to 1.00 for URE. Conclusions: These results indicate that acid-base status measurements using point-of-care demonstrated excellent reliability in high-level athletes, supporting sports scientists and coaches for athlete training and management.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".