Effects of 25-Min Nap Opportunity during Ramadan Observance on the 5-m Shuttle Run Performance and the Perception of Fatigue in Physically Active Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We aimed to investigate the effects of a 25-min nap opportunity on physical performance during the 5-m shuttle run test (5mSRT), feelings (i.e., evaluated by the feeling scale), attention (i.e., evaluated by the digit cancellation test) and the perception of fatigue (i.e., recorded by the rating of perceived exertion (RPE)) during Ramadan observance. Twelve physically active men (age: 21.1 ± 3.2 yrs, height: 1.76 ± 0.05 m, body-mass: 71.2 ± 9.3 kg) voluntarily participated in five test sessions: 15 days before Ramadan (BR), the first 10 days of Ramadan (FR), the last 10 days of Ramadan (ER), 10 days after Ramadan (10AR) and 20 days after Ramadan (20AR). During each test session, participants performed the digit cancellation test, a 5-min standard warm-up, the 5mSRT (6 × 30-s with 35-s intervals-between) and the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) after no-nap (N0) and 25-min nap opportunity (N25) conditions. Participants also completed the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) during each period. The total distance covered during the 5mSRT did not differ significantly before, during or after Ramadan, but was significantly greater after N25 compared to N0 at 10AR (687.5 ± 23.0 m vs. 725.6 ± 41.1 m; p = 0.018) and 20AR (698.3 ± 19.8 m vs. 742.6 ± 58.3 m; p = 0.003). The attention scores were higher after N25 in comparison with N0 at 10AR (p = 0.04) and 20AR (p = 0.02). RPE scores were not significantly different between N25 and N0 conditions. Feelings scores were higher after N25 compared to N0 during both FR (p = 0.007) and 20AR (p = 0.04). A significant deterioration of sleep quality was recorded during Ramadan (i.e., PSQI scores were significantly higher during and after compared to BR (p < 0.0005)). A 25-min nap opportunity was beneficial for physical and cognitive performance after Ramadan observance; however, any effect is insufficient to show significant beneficial impacts during Ramadan.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".