EFFECT OF BODY HYPOHYDRATION ON AEROBIC PERFORMANCE OF BOYS WHO EXERCISE IN THE HEAT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the effect of various levels of body hypohydration on aerobic performance in boys. METHODS: Seven 10- to 12-year-old boys attended three sessions in which they first dehydrated through exercise (6×10-min bouts at 40–45% VO2max) in a climatic chamber, then rested for 45 min in a thermoneutral room and finally performed in 35°C, 50% relative humidity an all-out cycling test at 90% VO2max. Dehydration was aimed to induce hypohydration of 0%, 1% or 2% of initial body weight (BW). These were achieved through individualized combinations of climatic heat stress and drinking regimens. Session sequence was counterbalanced. BW changes, total work to exhaustion (TW) in kJ and heart rate (HR) were recorded. RESULTS: As intended, initial BW changes (−0.02 ± 0.02 %BW, −1.08 ± 0.06 %BW, −2.12 ± 0.05 %BW, for 0%, 1% and 2%, respectively) were significantly different (p < 0.001) among the sessions. TW was significantly lower −49.2 ± 10.0 kJ (p < 0.05) and 40.2 ± 7.8 kJ (p < 0.05) – in 1% and 2%, respectively, than in 0% (55.5 ± 11.3 kJ). HR at the end of the test reached a similar level (on average, 189–193 bpm, 95–98 %HRmax) in all sessions. CONCLUSION: Even mild (1%BW) to moderate (2%BW) hypohydration causes significant reduction in aerobic performance of boys at 35 °C, 50% relative humidity. Therefore, dehydration should be prevented to maintain performance in the heat. Supported by Gatorade Sports Science Institute
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".