Practical application of a mixed active and passive heat acclimation protocol in elite male Olympic team sport athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate effectiveness and retention of heat acclimation (HA) integrated within an elite rugby sevens team training program, 12 elite male rugby sevens athletes undertook 10 days of mixed active/passive HA across 2 weeks of normal training. Physiological and performance variables were assessed using a sport-specific, repeated high-intensity heat-response test pre-HA; after 5 days (mid-HA) and 10 days (post-HA); and 16 days post-HA (decay). Resting, submaximal, and end-exercise core temperatures were lower at mid-HA (≤−0.26 °C; d ≥ −0.47), post-HA (≤−0.30 °C; d ≥ −0.72), and decay (≤−0.29 °C; d ≥ −0.56), compared to pre-HA. Sweat rate was greater at post-HA compared to pre-HA (0.3 ± 0.3 L·h−1; d = 0.63). Submaximal heart rate (HR) was lower at mid- (−9 ± 4 bpm; d = −0.68) and post-HA (−11 ± 4 bpm; d = −0.90) compared to pre-HA. Mean and peak 6 s power output improved at mid-HA (83 ± 52 W; 112 ± 67 W; d ≥ 0.47) and post-HA (125 ± 62 W; 172 ± 85 W; d ≥ 0.72) compared to pre-HA. Improvements in HR and performance persisted at decay ( d ≥ 0.66). The initial 5 days of mixed-methods HA elicited many typical HA adaptations, with an additional 5 days eliciting further thermoregulatory, sudomotor, and performance improvements. Adaptations were well retained after 16 days of normal training, without any further heat stimulus. The trial was retrospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12622000732785).
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".