MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sex Does Not Modify Fluid Balance During Work In The Heat When Drinking Ad Libitum

2023· article· en· W4387062711 on OpenAlexaff
Jo Hite, Jessica A. Freemas, Curtis S. Goss, Bruce Martin, Stephen Carter, Robert F. Chapman, Toby Mündel, Zachary J. Schlader

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMenstrual cycleLuteal phaseFollicular phaseFluid intakeMedicineFollicular fluidPhysiologyAnimal scienceEndocrinologyInternal medicinePsychologyHormoneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Occupational hydration recommendations are based on the premise that voluntarily fluid intake is insufficient during physical work in the heat, thereby increasing the likelihood of dehydration. Nearly all studies informing these recommendations have been performed in men. Ovarian sex hormones may reduce urine output and promote fluid intake. However, it is unknown if fluid balance during occupationally relevant physical work in the heat differs between men and women across menstrual cycle. PURPOSE: Test the hypothesis that when fluids are freely available during physical work in the heat men will be more dehydrated than women, independent of menstrual cycle phase. METHODS: Twelve healthy men (25 ± 5 y) and twelve healthy eumenorrheic women (26 ± 5 y) completed 4 h exposures to 33.7 ± 0.3 °C, 54 ± 1% relative humidity. Each hour participants walked for 30 min at an intensity evoking a rate of metabolic heat production of 5.2 ± 0.7 W/kg body mass, which did not differ between men and women (p ≥ 0.34). Participants drank a cool (12 ± 1 °C) flavor-preferred, non-caloric sport drink ad libitum. Men completed the exposure once. Women completed one exposure during the early follicular (EF), late follicular (LF) and mid-luteal (ML) phases of the menstrual cycle in a random order. Each phase was independently compared to the men. Data are presented as mean ± SD. RESULTS: The increase in rectal temperature during EF (+0.4 ± 0.2 °C, p = 0.16) and LF (+0.4 ± 0.2 °C, p = 0.31) did not differ from the men (+0.5 ± 0.3 °C) but was lower than the men in ML (0.3 ± 0.2, p = 0.05). Fluid intake (p ≥ 0.09) and sweat loss (p ≥ 0.06) did not differ from the men in EF, LF, or ML. Urine output during EF (833 ± 546 mL, p = 0.09) did not differ from men (525 ± 253 mL) but was higher than the men in LF (905 ± 593 mL, p = 0.05) and ML (940 ± 438 mL, p < 0.01). Changes in plasma volume did not differ from the men (+145 ± 157 mL) in EF (+175 ± 281 mL, p = 0.77), LF (+183 ± 263 mL, p = 0.69) or ML (+145 ± 263 mL, p = 0.77). Percent changes in body mass did not differ from men (-0.5 ± 0.5%) in EF (-0.5 ± 0.9%, p = 0.97), LF (-0.3 ± 0.9%, p = 0.44) or ML (-0.3 ± 0.7%, p = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: When fluids are readily available, fluid balance does not differ between men and women across the menstrual cycle during physical work in the heat. Supported by the ACSM Foundation Carl V. Gisolfi Memorial Fund & R01OH011528

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207