The Efficacy of Heat Acclimatization Pre-World Cup in Female Soccer Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The efficacy of a 14-day field-based heat acclimatization (HA) training camp in 16 international female soccer players was investigated over three phases: phase 1: 8 days moderate HA (22. 1°C); phase 2: 6 days high HA (34.5°C); and phase 3: 11 days of post-HA (18.2°C), with heart rate (HR), training load, core temp (Tc), and perceptual ratings recorded throughout. The changes from baseline (day−16) in (i) plasma volume (PV), (ii) HR during a submaximal running test (HRex) and HR recovery (HRR), and (iii) pre-to-post phase 2 (days 8–13) in a 4v4 small-sided soccer game (4V4SSG) performance were assessed. Due to high variability, PV non-significantly increased by 7.4% ± 3.6% [standardized effect (SE) = 0.63; p = 0.130] from the start of phase 1 to the end of phase 2. Resting Tc dropped significantly [p < 0.001 by −0.47 ± 0.29°C (SE = −2.45)], from day 1 to day 14. Submaximal running HRR increased over phase 2 (HRR; SE = 0.53) after having decreased significantly from baseline (p = 0.03). While not significant (p > 0.05), the greatest HR improvements from baseline were delayed, occurring 11 days into phase 3 (HRex, SE = −0.42; HRR, SE = 0.37). The 4v4SSG revealed a moderate reduction in HRex (SE = −0.32; p = 0.007) and a large increase in HRR (SE = 1.27; p < 0.001) from pre-to-post phase 2. Field-based HA can induce physiological changes beneficial to soccer performance in temperate and hot conditions in elite females, and the submaximal running test appears to show HRex responses induced by HA up to 2 weeks following heat exposure.
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) | 0.001 | 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".