MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Menstrual cycle and oral contraceptive use do not modify postexercise heat loss responses

2008· article· en· W2048714118 on OpenAlexaff
Glen P. Kenny, Emily Leclair, Ronald J. Sigal, W. Shane Journeay, D. Kilby, Lindsay Nettlefold, Francis D. Reardon, Ollie Jay

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMenstrual cycleMedicinePhysiologyPhysical exerciseMenstruationInternal medicinePhysical therapyEndocrinologyHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is unknown whether menstrual cycle or oral contraceptive (OC) use influences nonthermal control of postexercise heat loss responses. We evaluated the effect of menstrual cycle and OC use on the activation of heat loss responses during a passive heating protocol performed pre- and postexercise. Women without OC (n = 8) underwent pre- and postexercise passive heating during the early follicular phase (FP) and midluteal phase (LP). Women with OC (n = 8) underwent testing during the active pill consumption (high exogenous hormone phase, HH) and placebo (low exogenous hormone phase, LH) weeks. After a 60-min habituation at 26 degrees C, subjects donned a liquid conditioned suit. Mean skin temperature was clamped at approximately 32.5 degrees C for approximately 15 min and then gradually increased, and the absolute esophageal temperature at which the onset of forearm vasodilation (Th(vd)) and upper back sweating (Th(sw)) were noted. Subjects then cycled for 30 min at 75% Vo(2 peak) followed by a 15-min seated recovery. A second passive heating was then performed to establish postexercise values for Th(vd) and Th(sw). Between 2 and 15 min postexercise, mean arterial pressure (MAP) remained significantly below baseline (P < 0.05) by 10 +/- 1 and 11 +/- 1 mmHg for the FP/LH and LP/HH, respectively. MAP was not different between cycle phases. During LP/HH, Th(vd) was 0.16 +/- 0.24 degrees C greater than FP/LH preexercise (P = 0.020) and 0.15 +/- 0.23 degrees C greater than FP/LH postexercise (P = 0.017). During LP/HH, Th(sw) was 0.17 +/- 0.23 degrees C greater than FP/LH preexercise (P = 0.016) and 0.18 +/- 0.16 degrees C greater than FP/LH postexercise (P = 0.001). Postexercise thresholds were significantly greater (P < or = 0.001) than preexercise during both FP/LH (Th(vd), 0.22 +/- 0.03 degrees C; Th(sw), 0.13 +/- 0.03 degrees C) and LP/HH (Th(vd), 0.21 +/- 0.03 degrees C; Th(sw), 0.14 +/- 0.03 degrees C); however, the effect of exercise was similar between LP/HH and FP/LH. No effect of OC use was observed. We conclude that neither menstrual cycle nor OC use modifies the magnitude of the postexercise elevation in Th(vd) and Th(sw).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations22
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207