MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Hormonal Cycling And Substrate Oxidation At Rest And During Exercise: A Systematic Review And Meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4294844743 on OpenAlexaff
Mai Wageh, Jennifer S. Williams, Devin G. McCarthy, Mark A. Tarnopolsky, Maureen J. MacDonald, Martin J. Gibala, Stuart M. Phillips, Gianni Parise

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle metabolism and nutrition
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFollicular phaseLuteal phaseMenstrual cycleMeta-analysisInternal medicineEndocrinologyExercise physiologyMedicineHormoneChemistryPhysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluctuations of endogenous and exogenous sex hormones across the menstrual cycle (MC) and oral contraceptive (OC) cycle have been suggested to influence rest and exercise substrate metabolism in females. However, there is no clear consensus on the relationship between substrate oxidation and MC or OC phase in females. PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the impact of MC and OC cycle phase on substrate oxidation in females at rest and during moderate-intensity continuous exercise. METHODS: Five databases were searched to identify studies including female participants assessed during ≥2 hormonal cycle phases and substrate oxidation determined at rest and/or during moderate-intensity continuous exercise via indirect calorimetry. Data were excluded if substrate metabolism was experimentally manipulated, collected earlier than 5 min into exercise, or if a physiological “steady-state" could not be achieved during exercise. Pairwise meta-analyses examined the effect of MC phase, follicular versus luteal, and OC phase, inactive versus active, on the standardized mean difference (SMD) of each substrate oxidation measurement. Study quality was assessed using a modified Downs and Black checklist, and certainty of the evidence was determined using GRADE criteria. RESULTS: 51 eligible trials were identified for analysis. Analysis of MC phases from 24 studies for resting trials (n = 487) and 23 studies for exercise trials (n = 441) observed that RER was unaffected in the luteal versus follicular phase at rest (SMD = 0.03, 95% CI = -0.16, 0.21, P = 0.78; very low certainty) or during exercise (SMD = -0.01, 95% CI = -0.20, 0.19, P = 0.95; very low certainty). Analysis of OC phase from 7 studies (n = 122) found that RER was lower in the active versus inactive OC phase during exercise (SMD = -0.40, 95% CI = -0.77, -0.03, P = 0.03; low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: We found no effect of MC phase on substrate oxidation at rest or during moderate-intensity continuous exercise. The active OC phase may be associated with greater lipid oxidation during moderate-intensity continuous exercise than the inactive OC phase, indicating a possible effect of exogenous rather than endogenous hormones on substrate oxidation during exercise.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.027
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicMuscle metabolism and nutrition→French-language works237,207→