Urine specific gravity as an indicator of dehydration in Olympic combat sport athletes; considerations for research and practice

Urine specific gravity (U_SG) is the most commonly reported biochemical marker used in research and applied settings to detect fluid deficits in athletes, including those participating in combat sports. Despite the popularity of its use, there has been a growing debate regarding the diagnostic accuracy and the applicability of U_SG in characterizing whole-body fluid status and fluctuations. Moreover, recent investigations report universally high prevalence of hypohydration (～90%) via U_SG assessment in combat sport athletes, often in spite of stable body-mass. Given the widespread use in both research and practice, and its use in a regulatory sense as a ‘hydration test’ in combat sports as a means to detect dehydration at the time of weigh-in; understanding the limitations and applicability of U_SG assessment is of paramount importance. Inconsistencies in findings of U_SG readings, possibly as a consequence of diverse methodological research approaches and/or overlooked confounding factors, preclude a conclusive position stand within current combat sports research and practice. Thus the primary aim of this paper is to critically review the literature regarding U_SG assessment of hydration status in combat sports research and practice. When taken on balance, the existing literature suggests: the use of laboratory derived benchmarks in applied settings, inconsistent sampling methodologies, the incomplete picture of how various confounding factors affect end-point readings, and the still poorly understood potential of renal adaptation to dehydration in combat athletes; make the utility of hydration assessment via U_SG measurement quite problematic, particularly when diet and training is not controlled.     

Efficient video-on-demand services over mobile datacast channels

[1]Engebretsen,L.,Sudan,M.,2002.Harmonic Broadcasting is Bandwidth-Optimal Assuming Constant Bit Rate.Proc.Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms.San Francisco,CA,USA. [2]ETSI,2005.IP Datacast over DVB-H:Content Delivery Protocols.ETSI Standard,Draft,V0.0.9. [3]Horn,G.B.,Knudsgaard,P.,Lassen,S.B.,Luby,M.,Rasmussen,J.E.,2001.A scalable and reliable paradigm for media on demand.IEEE Computer,34(9):40-45. [4]Hu,A.,2001.Video-on-Demand Broadcasting Protocols:A Comprehensive Study.Proc.IEEE Infocom.Anchorage,Alaska. [5]Huang,C.,Janakiraman,R.,Xu,L.,2004.Loss-Resilient Media Streaming Using Priority Encoding.Proc.ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM‘04).New York,USA. [6]Jenka(c),H.,Stockhammer,T.,2005.Asynchronous Media Streaming over Wireless Broadcast Channels.Proc.of International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME).Amsterdam,The Netherlands. [7]Luby,M.,Gemmel,J.,Vicisano,L.,Rizzo,L.,Handley,M.,Crowcroft,J.,2002a.Asynchronous Layered Coding (ALC) Protocol Instantiation.RFC 3450,IETF. [8]Luby,M.,Gemmel,J.,Vicisano,L.,Rizzo,L.,Handley,M.,Crowcroft,J.,2002b.Layered Coding Transport (LCT)Building Block.RFC 3451,IETF. [9]Luby,M.,Vicisano,L.,Gemmel,J.,Handley,M.,Crowcroft,J.,2002c.Forward Error Correction (FEC) Building Block.RFC 3452,IETF. [10]Luby,M.,Watson,M.,Gasiba,T.,Stockhammer,T.,Xu,W.,2006.Raptor Codes for Reliable Download Delivery in Wireless Broadcast Systems.Proc.Consumer and Communications Networking Conference (CCNC).Las Vegas,NV,USA. [11]Paila,T.,Luby,M.,Lehtonen,R.,Roca,V.,Walsh,R.,2004.FLUTE-File Delivery over Unidirectional Transport.RFC 3926,IETF. [12]Peltotalo,J.,Peltotalo,S.,Harju,J.,2005.Analysis of the FLUTE Data Carousel.Proc.10th EUNICE Open European Summer School.Colmenarejo,Spain. [13]Shokrollahi,A.,2003.Raptor Codes.Tech.Rep.DR2003-06-001,Digital Fountain. [14]TM-CBMS1361,2005.Proposal for Simulations for Evaluation of Application Layer FEC for File Delivery. [15]Xu,L.,2001.Efficient and Scalable on-Demand Data Streaming Using UEP Codes.Proc.ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM‘01).Ottawa,Ontario,Canada.