Short-term heat acclimation improves the determinants of endurance performance and 5-km running performance in the heat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the effect of 5 days of controlled short-term heat acclimation (STHA) on the determinants of endurance performance and 5-km performance in runners, relative to the impairment afforded by moderate heat stress. A control group (CON), matched for total work and power output (2.7 W·kg −1 ), differentiated thermal and exercise contributions of STHA on exercise performance. Seventeen participants (10 STHA, 7 CON) completed graded exercise tests (GXTs) in cool (13 °C, 50% relative humidity (RH), pre-training) and hot conditions (32 °C, 60% RH, pre- and post-training), as well as 5-km time trials (TTs) in the heat, pre- and post-training. STHA reduced resting (p = 0.01) and exercising (p = 0.04) core temperature alongside a smaller change in thermal sensation (p = 0.04). Both groups improved the lactate threshold (LT, p = 0.021), lactate turnpoint (LTP, p = 0.005) and velocity at maximal oxygen consumption (vV̇O 2max ; p = 0.031) similarly. Statistical differences between training methods were observed in TT performance (STHA, −6.2(5.5)%; CON, −0.6(1.7)%, p = 0.029) and total running time during the GXT (STHA, +20.8(12.7)%; CON, +9.8(1.2)%, p = 0.006). There were large mean differences in change in maximal oxygen consumption between STHA +4.0(2.2) mL·kg −1 ·min −1 (7.3(4.0)%) and CON +1.9(3.7) mL·kg −1 ·min −1 (3.8(7.2)%). Running economy (RE) deteriorated following both training programmes (p = 0.008). Similarly, RE was impaired in the cool GXT, relative to the hot GXT (p = 0.004). STHA improved endurance running performance in comparison with work-matched normothermic training, despite equality of adaptation for typical determinants of performance (LT, LTP, vV̇O 2max ). Accordingly, these data highlight the ergogenic effect of STHA, potentially via greater improvements in maximal oxygen consumption and specific thermoregulatory and associated thermal perception adaptations absent in normothermic training.
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".