Effect of menstrual cycle and contraceptive pill phase on aspects of exercise physiology and athletic performance in female athletes: protocol for the <i>Feminae</i> international multisite innovative project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
' has become the slogan for sport and exercise physiology-based research in female athletes. However, in most instances, it is challenging to address this gap of high-quality research in elite female athletes at a single study site due to challenges in recruiting enough participants with numerous menstrual cycle and contraceptive pill permutations. Accordingly, we have assembled an international multisite team to undertake an innovative project for female athletes, which investigates the effects of changes in endogenous and exogenous oestrogen and progesterone/progestins across the menstrual cycle and in response to second-generation combined monophasic contraceptive pill use, on aspects of exercise physiology and athletic performance. This project will employ the current gold-standard methodologies in this area, resulting in an adequately powered dataset. This protocol paper describes the consortium-based approach we will undertake during this study.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".