Editorial: Training and performance in swimming

Throughout the sport-science and sports-medicine literature, the term “elite” subjects might be one of the most overused and ill-defined terms. Currently, there is no common perspective or terminology to characterize the caliber and training status of an individual or cohort. This paper presents a 6-tiered Participant Classification Framework whereby all individuals across a spectrum of exercise backgrounds and athletic abilities can be classified. The Participant Classification Framework uses training volume and performance metrics to classify a participant to one of the following: Tier 0: Sedentary; Tier 1: Recreationally Active; Tier 2: Trained/Developmental; Tier 3: Highly Trained/National Level; Tier 4: Elite/International Level; or Tier 5: World Class. We suggest the Participant Classification Framework can be used to classify participants both prospectively (as part of study participant recruitment) and retrospectively (during systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses). Discussion around how the Participant Classification Framework can be tailored toward different sports, athletes, and/or events has occurred, and sport-specific examples provided. Additional nuances such as depth of sport participation, nationality differences, and gender parity within a sport are all discussed. Finally, chronological age with reference to the junior and masters athlete, as well as the Paralympic athlete, and their inclusion within the Participant Classification Framework has also been considered. It is our intention that this framework be widely implemented to systematically classify participants in research featuring exercise, sport, performance, health, and/or fitness outcomes going forward, providing the much-needed uniformity to classification practices.

Statistical parametric maps (SPMs) are potentially powerful ways of localizing differences in regional cerebral activity. This potential is limited by uncertainties in assessing the significance of these maps. In this report, we describe an approach that may partially resolve this issue. A distinction is made between using SPMs as images of change significance and using them to identify foci of significant change. In the first case, the SPM can be reported nonselectively as a single mathematical object with its omnibus significance. Alternatively, the SPM constitutes a large number of repeated measures over the brain. To reject the null hypothesis, that no change has occurred at a specific location, a threshold adjustment must be made that accounts for the large number of comparisons made. This adjustment is shown to depend on the SPM's smoothness. Smoothness can be determined empirically and be used to calculate a threshold required to identify significant foci. The approach models the SPM as a stationary stochastic process. The theory and applications are illustrated using uniform phantom images and data from a verbal fluency activation study of four normal subjects.